CNIC Protests the Cabinet Decision on the Seventh Strategic Energy Plan

February 19, 2025

On February 18, 2025, the Ishiba Cabinet approved the Seventh Strategic Energy Plan, which removed the invaluable lesson learned from the accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, which was to reduce dependency on nuclear power as far as possible, and conversely set out a policy for the sustained use of nuclear power. We protest this decision with anger and sorrow.

Non-scientific

Under this new seventh Strategic Energy Plan the target is to reduce greenhouse gases by 73% in FY2040 (compared with FY2013) and power generation is set at 1.1 trillion to 1.2 trillion kWh. To generate this power, the power supply mix ratios are defined as renewables 40 to 50%, nuclear power 20%, and thermal generation 30 to 40%.

According to CNIC’s own estimates, if all the reactors, including those under construction, are operated with lifetime extension, nuclear power will barely reach around 20%. This estimate could only be achieved on the assumption that the reactors including Tsuruga Nuclear Power Plant Unit 2, whose approval to restart has been denied; Shika Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2, which were damaged by the Noto Peninsula Earthquake; all units of Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant; and those under construction, such as Ohma Nuclear Power Plant and TEPCO’s Higashidoori Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1, can all be operated. In short, this goal is unrealistic.

In addition, according to the results of the simulation by the Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE), which was the basis for the estimation of this power generation and supply mix ratio, in order to maintain 30-40% of thermal power in FY2040 under the premise of achieving the decarbonization target, it will be necessary to shift 50-90% of thermal power generation to decarbonized thermal power (thermal power with carbon capture and storage (CCS), hydrogen-ammonia mono-combustion or mixed combustion, and so on.).

World Energy Outlook 2024, the report of the IEA (International Energy Agency), indicates that the share of decarbonized thermal power in the global power supply will not exceed 2% in 2040 in any of their three scenarios. The share of nuclear power is forecast to be 10% at the most. On the other hand, the predicted share of renewable energy is 66-85%. It seems that Japan’s power generation and supply mix is about to enter its own unique territory that ignores the direction of the rest of the world.

Why, then, is Japan rapidly expanding nuclear power and decarbonized thermal power against the world trend of the rapid expansion of renewable energy? A major factor in this is economic efficiency.

In the verification of power generation cost conducted in formulating the Strategic Energy Plan, it was considered that the power generation cost of nuclear power plants is relatively low, and that although variable renewable energy is inexpensive, use of the concept of integration cost suggests that it is a power source that harbors many problems. However, according to data from the U.S. investment institution Lazard and the major information service company Bloomberg, the cost of nuclear power generation is much higher than that of other power sources, while that of renewable energy is extremely low. Even in this respect, Japan is following its own path. Why is nuclear power considered to be cheap in Japan? The biggest factor is the construction cost. In Japan, the cost of building new nuclear plant is estimated to be around 720 billion yen per unit, while the construction cost of nuclear power plants currently under construction, or which have recently started operation, in Europe and United States has exceeded 2 trillion yen per unit across the board. Even nuclear power plants under construction in developing countries often exceed 1 trillion yen per unit, revealing how large an underestimation Japan’s assumption is.

In addition, according to RITE’s assumptions, the gas-fired power ratio, including CCS, in the power generation and supply mix in 2040 will be around 20-30%. Even the Seventh Strategic Energy Plan states that “it is necessary to utilize LNG fire power as a practical transition energy.” According to the evaluation of life-cycle CO2 emissions by power supply conducted by the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, gas-fired power has the lowest emission of greenhouse gases among all the thermal power generation methods at 735.5g-CO2/kWh (coal-fired power plants emit 942.7g-CO2/kWh). However, a study published last year indicates the possibility that greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. natural gas is higher than that of coal.

Since a large amount of greenhouse gases are emitted in the process of production, liquefaction, and transportation of natural gas, even when CCS equipment is installed in a power plant, not all the greenhouse gases emitted will be captured.

The target for the introduction of nuclear power and decarbonized thermal power is far too unrealistic, and it is clear from the beginning that the decarbonization target, relying heavily on these two methods and gas-fired power, cannot be achieved.

Deception

The Strategic Energy Plan mentions that “in Kyushu and Kansai areas where the restarts of nuclear power plants is progressing, the ratio of decarbonized power supply is increasing and electricity bills are up to 30% lower than in other areas. In addition, the effect of the restarts has been returns to consumers in the form of reductions in electricity bills,” emphasizing the effect of restarting nuclear power plants on electricity rates. However, it is not only Kansai Electric Power Company and Kyushu Electric Power Company that have restarted nuclear power plants but also Shikoku Electric Power Company, Chugoku Electric Power Company, and Tohoku Electric Power Company. With the exception of Hokkaido Electric Power Company, the electricity rates of these companies do not differ significantly from those of companies that have not yet restarted nuclear power plants.

Rather, the problem is the huge investments on safety measures and maintenance costs required even for nuclear power plants which have no prospect of restarting. Analyses of nuclear power operators’ financial statements, the annual maintenance cost since FY2011 of a nuclear power plant which has not generated even 1kWh has exceeded an average 1 trillion yen. Naturally, these costs are included in electricity bills. In other words, it is not that electricity rates are being reduced by restarting nuclear power plants, but the price of electricity is being raised by nuclear power plant maintenance.

Undemocratic

For the Seventh Strategic Energy Plan, the number of public comment submissions reached a record high of 41,421 for Strategic Energy Plan. Submissions began on December 27, 2024, when the end of the year was approaching, and closed on January 26, 2025. While there are generally less than a few hundred public comments submitted in most cases, it is surprising that so many comments were submitted during a busy period that included the new year holidays.

As the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) gave responses only to summaries of the opinions submitted, it is not clear how many of what kind of opinions were submitted, but METI revealed at the press conference that there were large numbers of negative comments about the active use of nuclear power. Meanwhile, METI explained that the removal of the phrase “reducing dependency on the nuclear power as far as possible” was at the request of the nuclear industry and local governments where nuclear power plants are located.

Public Comments or the Public Comment Procedure is “a procedure in which administrative organs establishing Administrative Orders, etc. (Cabinet Orders, Ministerial Orders, etc.) must make the proposed Administrative Orders, etc. public in advance and invite opinions and information on the draft from the general public.”  The procedure was introduced by the Amendments of the Administrative Procedure Act in June 2005. Although the Strategic Energy Plan itself is not an Order and thus the public comment procedure was voluntary, it can be said that the opinions of those who benefit from the promotion of nuclear power made outside legal procedure were given more importance than opinions submitted in accordance with the law.

Towards a Scientific and Democratic Energy Policy

The Seventh Strategic Energy Plan holds many more problems other than those pointed out in this statement. Those problems arise because the energy policy is determined intuitively by de facto collusion among stakeholders. In recent years, EBPM, evidence-based policy making, has been required in the policy-making processes, but we believe EBPM has not been used in energy policy making. For example, there was hardly any discussion on how the power generation and supply mix should be determined, and METI pushed through the RITE estimate as if it were some kind of golden rule.

We believe that democratic debate based on facts is essential for convincing and rational policy formation. In order to achieve that, there are many points that can be improved, such as redressing the strongly biased composition of the council, the elimination of secretariat-led discussions, and more conscientious responses to public comments. While we have but a little power to exert, we will continue to work to achieve these improvements and the end of nuclear power.