Hot times in Tokyo

The EEB project's governance includes an Assurance Group whose job it is to keep us on track and provide a high-level response to our work. Hosted by TEPCO and Kansai, the two major utilities in Japan and members of the EEB Core group, the meeting at TEPCO's headquarters in central Tokyo gave us an insight into the clash between energy savings and personal comfort. The Japanese government has decided that air conditioners should not be set below 28°. Short-sleeved, open neck shirts are now the order of the day, but it's still hot!

The reason for this is that the authorities had to close down the world's biggest nuclear plant, Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Station on the Japanese North-West coast. A very strong earthquake hit an area under the sea northwest of the power station in July 2007. It has to be thoroughly inspected before being allowed to restart. Overnight the Kanto area including Tokyo – Yokohama area lost 8,200 MW of generation capacity. Dramatic action was needed to prevent blackouts, including the regulation on office temperatures and the relaxation of the dress code.

The EEB assurance group is chaired by Klaus Toepfer, former head of the UN Environment Programme. Other members present in Tokyo were Prof. Vivian Loftness (Carnegie Mellon University), Prof. Shin-ichi Tanabe, (Waseda University) and Prof. Yi Jiang (Tsinghua University). Prof. Thomas Johansson (Lund University) and Eileen Claussen (Head of PEW Centre) were unable to participate.

The Assurance Group exists to promote the EEB project's quality and accountability. It provides comments and advice in areas such as process, scope and conclusions. The Assurance Group is charged with ensuring, and ultimately testifying, that the EEB Project maintains a high level of integrity and accountability.

It carries out these responsibilities diligently, keeping us on our toes. The Group gave us many useful comments and reflections during the frank and vivid discussions with the project team. They included some detailed comments such as being clearer about the difference between end-use and primary energy. Here are my top 10 comments from the discussion:

• We must be consistent with the first stage of the project. The Assurance Group recommended that we still refer to the business levers defined in the first report (holistic approach, financing and behavior). Financing is still not explored enough in our current work.
• Keep the positive "tone" of the project. In the first report, the EEB project created expectations on possible results; they should be maintained even if it will demand very strong actions by different stakeholders.
• EEB's data collection, submarket focus and simulation modeling are unique. For the first time, we will be able to quantify and evaluate the economic rationale for different policy instruments on submarkets. In order to explore the full potential for change in energy efficiency in buildings, the behavior aspects have to be fully integrated in the modeling.
• So far, the modeling results show limited effects of traditional and planned policy instruments on energy use and CO 2 emissions in different building submarkets. The inertia in the building stock as well as its forecast growth neutralizes most individual policy actions. It was a surprise for the Assurance Group members, who saw it highlighting the need for more combined actions.
• The project should not be too visionary, but should concentrate on short- to medium-term options. But on the other hand, we should not “kill people” with too much data. Decision-makers need information on which they can design policy instruments and implement actions at lowest costs.
• EEB represents the building industry and is a business voice on issues surrounding energy efficiency in buildings. Therefore, it is important that the report outline the challenges and business opportunities for the building sector. “We cannot end up in a situation that the project is able to produce wonderful results but others have to do it [the implementing].” Business' own responsibility and commitments need to be in focus.
• Passive solutions and indoor climate aspects related to good design and quality are as important as new building technology options.
• As regards China, it is important to “control” the development of the building stock. For China, technology can not be the final solution. China must find its own new way of modern living.
• The present analyses assume submarket independence but there might be crossovers…family to multifamily houses as an example. Likewise, the building size issue (space) versus the number of people living in the building.
• The holistic approach. The Assurance Group recommended that we deepen our understanding of the importance of urbanization, city planning, landscaping, links to transport, services and jobs.

The other message was that the project needs to stay focused, concentrate on a few submarkets, effectively capture the learnings and package policy recommendations to be able to communicate and influence stakeholders.

Meanwhile, we are organizing three high-level workshops, on Behavior (London in August), Holistic approach (September, venue tbd) and Finance (New York in October).

You will find more on this in my next blogs. I wish you a happy summer break (and that it not be too hot in the office).

Comments

[Margaret Johnson]

Dear Christian

I am very interested in Japan's Cool Biz intervention. I have been involved with other work colleagues in developing and implementing energy efficiency projects and have been following Japan's approach for more than a year now.

While an increase in indoor air temperature to 28 degrees celsius is very dramatic, we've been considering more moderate adjustments of up to 1.5 degrees.

Our understanding is that even this level of adjustment can have quite a significant impact but it's been very difficult to find any meaningful or hard data to support this. I would be very interested in any data available on the potential reductions that can be made from moderating temperature setting ranges. Our view is that moderate temperature range increases can also improve comfort levels for building inhabitants. But again, data on this is difficult to find.

Kind regards

Margaret Johnson

[Busby SEO Challenge]

nice post!..thanks for the tip...