Japan's Action Plan for a Low Carbon Society

8/9/2019 Japan's Action Plan for a Low Carbon Society

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/japans-action-plan-for-a-low-carbon-society 1/24

Towards a Transition to Low Carbon

Society: Japan¶s actions in the context of

pursuing global sustainability

3 August 2010

Hironori Hamanaka

Chair of the Board of DirectorsInstitute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)Professor, Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio

University

ASEFUAN 9 th Annual Conference: Act for environment



Outline

Bali Action Plan and Copenhagen Accord

Beyond Copenhagen: Major challenges

Actions toward a transition to low carbonsociety in Japan

Lessons from Japan¶s experience and a wayforward



Bali Action Plan

(2007)

Parties launchedParties launched a comprehensive process to address::

A shared vision for « a longfor « a long--term global goal for term global goal for emission reductions,emission reductions,

Enhanced « action on mitigation of climate change:Enhanced « action on mitigation of climate change: M easurable, reportable and verifiable ( MRV) ««c ommitments or actionsor actions, « by all developed, « by all developedcountry Parties, while ensuring thecountry Parties, while ensuring the comparability comparability

of efforts among them,of efforts among them, N ationally appropriate mitigation ac tions byby

developing country Parties in the context of developing country Parties in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabledsustainable development, supported and enabledby technology, financing and capacityby technology, financing and capacity--building in abuilding in a

MRV manner.MRV manner.



Copenhagen

Accord (2009) At COP15, most Parties supported

the ³Copenhagen Accord´, in that they:

Recognized that the increase in

global temperature should be below 2

. Annex I Parties commit to implement emissions

targets f or 2020 , to be submitted by 31 January2010.

N on- Annex I Parties will implement mitigation

ac tions, including those to be submitted by 31January 2010, that will be subject to their domesti c measurement, reporting and

veri f ication ( MRV ) «



Copenhagen Accord

(Continued) Non-Annex I Parties« the result of (domestic MRV)

will be reported through their nationalcommunications every two years, with provisionsfor international c onsultations and analysis

under clearly defined guidelines. M itigation actionsseeking international support will be subject tointernational MRV.

The collective commitment by developed countriesis to provide new and additional resources,approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010±2012 . Developed countries commit to a goal of mobilizing jointly USD 100 billion dollars a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries.



Copenhagen Accord

and Its Implementation Copenhagen Accord is a step forward to

enable developing c ountries to take

mitigation ac tions, and to ensure

transparenc y of these actions, in addition toenhanc ing mitigation c ommitments by

developed c ountries.

The Accord is signed up by more than 130 c ountries and more than 80 c ountries have

submitted their mitigation targets/ ac tions.



Mitigation targets/ actions

submitted by PartiesCountry Mitigation targets / actions

Japan 25% reduction from 1990 level

EU 20% reduction from 1990 level

US 17% reduction from 2005 level

China 40-45% reduction of CO2/GDP from 2005 level

Korea 30% reduction from BAU level

Indonesia 26% reduction from BAU level

India 20-25% reduction of CO2/GDP from 2005 level

Brazil 36.1-38.9% reduction from BAU level



Beyond Copenhagen:Major

Challenges It is not c lear as to whether targets and actions

submitted by Parties are c onsistent with GHG emissions pathways that c an limit the global

temperature inc rease below 2

. Stronger mitigation actions will likely to be

required, and that will need to be based on anew international climate regime that is

inc lusive, effec tive and equitable. Building trust and c onfidenc e is essential to

achieve an agreement on a new comprehensiveclimate regime.



± ± In order to build trust and confidence,In order to build trust and confidence,developed c ountries need:need:

ToTo take the lead take the lead in undertakingin undertaking robust

redu c tions in the mid-term consistent withconsistent withtheir their ambitious long ambitious long--term objectivesterm objectives, while, whileensuring theensuring the c omparability of efforts amongamongthem.them.

ToTo deliver support deliver support in terms of in terms of financ e,tec hnology, and c apac ity-building theytheypledged topledged to enable developing countries to takeenable developing countries to takeappropriate mitigation actionsappropriate mitigation actions..

Beyond Copenhagen:Major challenges (2)



Beyond Copenhagen:

Major challenges (3)

Developing c ountries need to formulate andneed to formulate andimplement nationally appropriate mitigationimplement nationally appropriate mitigationactions (NAMAs) that:actions (NAMAs) that:

RequireRequire mainstreaming climate actions intoclimate actions intonational development plans,national development plans,

Result inResult in dec oupling economic growth and economic growth and GHG emissionsGHG emissions through enhanced sectoral/through enhanced sectoral/crosscross--sectoral actionssectoral actions,, andand

EnsureEnsure transparenc y through domesticthrough domesticmeasurement, reporting and verification (MRV),measurement, reporting and verification (MRV),and ³international consultation and analysis´.and ³international consultation and analysis´.



Actions toward low carbon society:

Japan¶s commitment

R edu c e emissions by 25% fromits 1990 level by 2020 .

Mobilize all necessary policy tools,

including the introduction of adomestic emissions trading schemeand a feed-in-tariff for renewableenergy, as well as the consideration of a globalwarming tax.

Provide $15 billion, new and additional financialresources, both public and private, over 2010-12 aswell as enhanced technical assistance to developingcountries.



Note: Prepared based on the information released by the Ministry of the Environment, Japan

2020

Additional reduction

by 2.5% is necessary(Gt)

1.261

Gt

1.286Gt

Japan¶s

new

target

946Gt

Removals by

forests by

3.8%, use of

international

offsets by

1.6%

Additional reduction is

necessary in domestic

emissions by 2.2%



A Bill for the Fundamental Policy to

Address Global Warming (March 2010)

Target

A reduction of 25% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 below1990 level

Increasing the share of renewable energy to 10% by2020

Basic policies

Establishing domesti c emissions trading sc heme

Consideration of global warming tax to be

implemented from 2011 Introduction of a feed-in-tariff for renewable energy

E nergy effi c ienc y improvements in products andbuildings

Promoting adaptation measures to climate change



Development of a Medium- to Long-term

Roadmap for Reducing GHG Emissions

A pac kage of poli c ies and measures to achieve areduction of 25% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 below1990 level, and a roadmap for their implementation:

R enewable energy targets for 2020 Solar PV: ~50GW

Wind: ~11GW

Hydro (large/ small scale): ~28GW

Building sector: All new buildings meet the latest energyefficiency standards by 2020

T ransportation sector: Next-generation models occupyhalf of the new car sales



Development of a Medium- to Long-term

Roadmap for Reducing GHG Emissions

Estimation of additional investments for 2020and socio-economic impacts of GHG reductionpolicies and measures, both positive and

negative: Additional investments: $ 1 trillion from 2011 to

2020 .

Economic impacts: Overall positive, with new

markets ($450 billion) and job (1.25 million)created.



Japan¶s actions toward

low-carbon society: Challenges P oli c y c oordination and integration need to

be strengthened, particularly between climateand energy.

C onsensus need be built among stakeholderson designing key poli c y instruments: Domesti c emissions trading sc heme: Formula for

capping emissions (absolute volume vs. intensity)

Feed-in-tariff: How far the scheme should cover, howto share the additional cost of renewable energy.

M odeling studies on economic impacts, bothpositive and negative, of climate mitigation actionsneed to be further promoted.



Lessons from Japanese experience:Policies against environmental pollution

Remedial actions after damage has been causedby pollution: not only morally unjusti f iable, butec onomi c ally irrational : ³ prevention is better

than c ure´. Policies and measures for industrial pollution

control, once taken, was very effective inreducing pollution,

W ithout c ausing signifi c ant mac ro-ec onomi c

impac t (Environment Agency, 1977, OECD, 1978)

Benefit of pollution c ontrol outweighed G DP loss

(Morita, 1997).



Lessons from Japanese experience:Policies against environmental pollution (2)

Important factors for successful policies:

N ational c onsensus for pollution abatement.

Clear picture: polluters vs. pollution vi c tims.

Leading role played by loc al governments. Appropriate action by national government : target

setting, regulation, application of Polluter PaysPrinciple (PPP), and provision of fiscal and taxincentives to environmental investments.

Proactive investment by business and industries

in environmental technology R&D and application.

Environmental technologies were supplied bydomesti c industries.



Lessons from Japanese experience:

Climate and energy policies ³T op runner¶s approac h´ in setting energy

efficiency standards: Encouraged manufacturers to develop and

market products that meet the standards wellin advance of the deadline.

Green tax reform differentiating tax rates for products with different standards:

Considered to be instrumental in achievingvery rapid market penetration of low emission/fuel efficient vehicles.



Equipment Improvement in energy efficiency (Results)

TV sets 25.7% ( FY 1997 > FY 2003 )

Video-cassette recorders 73.6% ( FY 1997 > FY 2003 )

Air conditioners * 67.8% ( FY 1997 > FY 2004)

Electric refrigerators 55.2% ( FY 1998 > FY 2004)

Electric freezers 29.6% ( FY 1998 > FY 2004)

Gasoline passenger vehicles * 22.8% (FY 1995 > FY 2005)

* Note that the effects of reducing energy consumption are indicated as inversenumbers because COP or fuel economy (km/L) is used as an energy consumptionefficiency index.

Energy efficiency standards for electric appliances

and automobiles: Top Runner Program

Source: Kiyoshi Mori, ³Doing Energy Efficiency - The Japan Way ±³, March, 2008



Energy efficiency Standards

- Top Runner Program for Vehicles -

The fuel standard in 2010 wasalmost achieved in 2004.

New fuel efficiency standard- Target year: 2015 (base year 2004)

- Coverage: automobiles, trucks,

buses both gasoline and diesel

- Efficiency target

Fuel economy (Km/L)

Source: Vehicle Fuel Economy List

Type Efficiency target [2004 > 2015]

Automobiles 13.6km/l > 16.8km/l 23.5% improvement

Small-size Buses 8.3km/l > 8.9km/l 7.2% improvement

Small-size Trucks 13.6km/l > 16.8km/l 12.6% improvement

19951995--20052005

2323%%

improvementimprovement

Average fuel economy of

gasoline passenger

vehicles

Fuel economy

(Km/L)

Source: Kiyoshi Mori, ³Doing Energy Efficiency - The Japan Way ±³, March, 2008



A way forward

Scientific evidence indicates serious impact of climate change:

We need to avoid disastrous c onsequenc e.

Transition to low-carbon society requires afundamental, transformational c hange.

We need to take dec isive ac tions and to seekto gain the advantage of early movers:

Negative economic impact of strong climateactions could be offset if domestic industrieseffectively capture new opportunities (markets)created by these actions.



A way forward (continued)

Lead actions toward building low-carbon society

T ec hnology R&D and deployment : energyefficiency and renewable energy technologies,

including building social and physical infrastructuresnecessary for their wide-spread deployment

P utting a pri c e on c arbon: carbon tax anddomestic cap-and-trade scheme

Expanding FIT I ntegrating c limate poli c ies into ec onomi c and

energy poli c ies

S how c ase successful actions



Thank you very much

Professor Hironori Hamanaka

Chair of the Board of DirectorsInstitute for Global Environmental Strategies

[email protected]

Japan's Action Plan for a Low Carbon Society

Documents