East Asia Energy Futures Project Summary

 

                                                                        By EAEF Collaborators

                                                                        December 7, 2001

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

East Asia Energy Futures Project Summary....................... 2

1.      EAEF Project Objectives.. 2

1.1.            Alternative Energy Scenarios 2

2.      Project Activities (Phases I to IV)     3

2.1.            First Phase (1996-2000, Initial Data Collection)                3

2.2.        EAEF Second Phase (Jan. 2000-Feb.2001, Regional Network Development)         4

2.3.        EAEF Third Phase (February 2001 – mid-2002, National Scenarios Development)         5

2.4.        EAEF Fourth Phase (Proposed dates, 2002 to 2003, Regional Scenario Integration)            5

3.      Summary of the EAEF Framework Meeting, February 2001 6

3.1.            Methodology- Common Methods Energy Paths/Scenarios Development          6

3.2.            National Energy Scenarios – Summary of National Energy Interests and Priorities. 8

4.        Elaboration of Potential Research Directions 17

4.1.            Common Research Framework and Directions for Alternative Energy Scenarios                17

4.2.            Other Issues Discussed at the Meeting... 19

4.2.1.            Scenario Development – Questions of Feasibility                19

4.2.2.            Measurable Outcomes                19

4.2.3.            Target audiences                19

5.      Next Project Activities... 20

5.1.            Graduate students LEAP Email Working Group (June, 2001 – End of the EAEF project)... 20

5.2.            National Energy Paths Meeting and LEAP third workshop (October or November, 2001)       20

5.3.            Regional Scenario Integration and Regional Energy Paths Meeting (April or May, 2002) 21

5.4.        The Final Meeting (early 2003)                21

 


East Asia Energy Futures Project Summary

 

The Nautilus East Asia Energy Futures (EAEF) project has started its third phase of activities, In this phase, project participants, in partnership with the Nautilus Institute, are developing national alternative energy scenarios. The third phase of this project commenced earlier this year with a meeting of participants held in February at Nautilus Institute offices in Berkeley.  This meeting was successful in elaborating both the common contextual framework and research methodologies to be used in developing energy scenarios. This report summarizes the content of the presentations and discussions carried out during the framework meeting, and provides a general overview of the EAEF project – including its objectives, past research activities (Phases one and two), and proposed future activities.  

1.                 EAEF Project Objectives

The EAEF project has three main objectives:

 

1)      to develop a set of alternative future energy scenarios for each country in the Northeast Asian region individually as well as for the region as a whole;

2)      to develop and assemble accurate and comprehensive national energy data sets that can be shared with other researchers; and

3)      to establish clear and open means of communication between regional energy researchers, Nautilus staff, and others, in order to work collaboratively on national and regional energy scenarios analysis. 

 

1.1.            Alternative Energy Scenarios

The alternative energy scenarios under development in the EAEF project will be more than just future energy projections, or mere conceptual outcomes of what we would like to the future to be.  Rather, the scenarios will lay out sustainable, and feasible energy pathways that are supported by actual and realistic energy data for each country, and are geared toward improving energy security, in the broad sense, to the greatest degree possible.  The scenarios will be compiled and evaluated in a detailed manner using a common but flexible energy end-use-based energy system modeling software tool. As a result, unlike simple projections of future energy use, the individual assumptions in these scenarios can be examined in detail for reasonableness, and detailed quantitative results can be and used to track and measure the energy, economic, and environmental differences between different energy scenarios. Because the scenarios are quantitatively supported by actual energy data, it is also possible to consider what happens to regional energy security when each country orients their energy policy to so as to satisfy national energy priorities and interests. 

 

·         Regional Energy Database and Common Analytical Tool: LEAP

An important element of the EAEF project is the use of common analytical methods for developing and quantifying the feasibility of alternative scenarios in each of the collaborating countries. Quantitative energy scenario development in the EAEF project is carried out using an energy systems modeling software tool called LEAP (Long-range Energy Alternatives Planning System).  The EAEF scenarios development process in each country is using LEAP to organize, quantify, and elaborate detailed data sets that quantify energy supply and demand by fuel, transformation process, and energy-consuming sector, and also include development plans and projections for both energy supply and demand. LEAP provides a common analytical structure and tool for scenario analysis, allowing researchers to elaborate detailed energy datasets and scenario assumptions in a convenient and transparent way.  As a result, a broader range of researchers –including not only EAEF participants but also interested outside researchers– will be able to utilize the national energy datasets produced during the EAEF project, and to participate in the energy scenario analysis process. The use of a common analytical framework also simplifies the collaborative task of combining national energy futures into a coherent, consistent set of energy futures for the region as a whole.

 

·         Networking of Regional Energy Researchers

EAEF workshops have brought together project participants from the countries of the Northeast Asia region on a periodic basis.  In addition, the combination of an Internet web site for the project, e-mail list-servers, and other communications means are providing a forum for ongoing exchange of information and points of view between researchers.  The fact that all participants use a common scenario modeling framework—including common methodologies, common time horizons for analysis, and a common research direction for the energy paths they develop—assures that researchers can readily understand the studies produced in each nation and easily communicate ideas and results to each other.

2.                 Project Activities (Phases I to IV)

2.1.            First Phase (1996-2000, Initial Data Collection)

Assembling national energy datasets is the first step in developing and evaluating the feasibility of different energy scenarios using LEAP.  Analysis using LEAP requires, preferably, detailed historical end-use data in order to assure that the quantitative estimates of the costs and benefits of different future energy paths are as robust as possible.  In the first phase of the EAEF project, Nautilus Research Associate David Von Hippel complied energy data sets for Japan, China, Republic of Korea (ROK), Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), Hong Kong, and Chinese Taipei, and carried out partial analyses of baseline energy paths using LEAP. This energy databases thus created were also used for analysis carried out in other Nautilus energy projects, including the Energy, Security and Environment in Northeast Asia (ESENA) Project and the Pacific Asia Regional Energy Security (PARES) Project.  In the PARES project, Nautilus used LEAP and the LEAP Japan data set in collaborative work with Japanese and US partners in order to develop and evaluate alternative energy paths for Japan. The methodology for the analysis of the energy security impacts of different energy paths developed during the PARES project are expected to be adapted for use in the coming collaborative phase of the EAEF project. The PARES project, and the methodologies developed as a part of the PARES project, is briefly explained later in this report.

 

(Please Note: The LEAP energy data sets mentioned above, and the Excel files used to annotate and develop the LEAP data sets were provided to workshop participants on the CD-ROM distributed by Nautilus at the LEAP 2000 training workshop.  The data sets are in LEAP version 95 format.)

2.2.            EAEF Second Phase (Jan. 2000-Feb.2001, Regional Network Development)

In June of 2000, Nautilus Institute, in collaboration with Tsinghua University, organized a set of two workshops in Beijing.  The first workshop, which took place over two days, consisted of presentations and discussions on Northeast Asian regional energy issues.  This workshop was immediately followed by a three-day workshop on methods for energy and environmental security analysis, featuring the use of LEAP (at that time, version ’95).   As a part of the regional energy issues workshop, Nautilus commissioned 12 papers from Chinese and other regional authors on a variety of topics related to energy futures in the region.  These papers can be found online at http://www.nautilus.org/energy/eaef.

 

In the process of preparing and carrying out the first EAEF workshop, Nautilus was able to identify key organizations and individuals in the Northeast Asia region with the background and interest to participate in future phases of the ongoing EAEF project, and to serve as a loose collaborative network of regional energy researchers.  The table below lists the EAEF project participants, organized by country. 

 

Table I.  Project Participants

 

CHINA Tsinghua University                                                                         Zhang Aling       

Yanjia Wang

                                                                                                            Baolei Guo

 

ROK   Korean Energy Economics Institute

                                                Woo-Jin Chung

   

Hyun Jae Doh

           

           

Yonsei University

                                                                        Eui-Soon Shin

Ho-seok Kim

 

 

RFE    

Khabarovsk Economic Institute

                                                Victor Kalashnikov

 

                                                                                                                      Roman Matveev

           

Unified Power Grid of Russia

                                                            Alexander Ognev

 

 

 

JAPAN

Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry         Tatsujiro Suzuki

             

University of Tokyo

                                                                        Junichiro Oda, Takuro Kiuchi

 

DPRK

Non-conventional Energy Development Center

                        Kwan Ho Kim

           

Korean Anti-Nuclear Peace Committee

                                    Il Bong Kim

           

Electric Power and Remote Control Institute,

Ministry of Electricity and Coal Industry                              Jae Sue Kim

Nautilus Institute                                                                                         David Von Hippel

                                                                                                                      Rebecca Hansing

                                                                                                                      Masami Nakata                   

 

            

 

(Colleagues whose names appear in red constitute the informal “Graduate Students LEAP Working Group”)

2.3.            EAEF Third Phase (February 2001 – mid-2002, National Scenarios Development)

The goal of the third phase of the EAEF project is to produce updated[1] national “baseline” or reference and alternative energy scenarios for each of the countries in the region.  This phase commenced in February of 2001 with an EAEF Framework Meeting to discuss national energy interests and priorities, and to begin the formulation of a common research framework for compiling national alternative energy scenarios. The February 2001 workshop elaborated common research objectives and analytical methodologies in order that national teams could begin developing national energy scenarios, as well as to simplify the future task of combining national energy futures into a coherent, consistent set of energy futures for the region as a whole. In addition, a second (week-long) analytical training workshop took place just following the February Framework Meeting to train regional researchers to use LEAP 2000 (the newly-released Windows version of the LEAP tool), which is to be used as the primary tool for scenario analysis by the EAEF collaborative research group.

 

Each country team is currently collecting energy data and conducting its own national energy analysis, with Nautilus Institute providing support and input upon request. The national scenarios, and particularly the “alternative” scenarios, are expected to focus on improving national energy and environmental security situations over time, as discussed at the Framework Meeting.  At the end of this third EAEF phase, each country will write a report summarizing the national paths/scenarios that they have developed.  In addition, the EAEF research group will collaboratively summarize these results in a workshop report (each country team will have primary responsibility for the portion of the final report pertaining to their country).

 

2.4.            EAEF Fourth Phase (Proposed dates, 2002 to 2003, Regional Scenario Integration)

The fourth phase of the EAEF project is expected to include an aggregation of the national-level scenarios developed in the third EAEF phase in order to evaluate the relative energy security implications of each set of scenarios (baseline and alternative) to the region as a whole.  This phase of the project will develop one or more “alternative regional” scenarios that involve and require regional cooperation at a significant level.  Part of the task of the fourth EAEF phase will be to compare how these scenarios compare to the nationally optimized[2] scenarios - scenarios in which each country pursues its own "most cost-effective" or "most energy-secure" path or other alternative paths. This fourth EAEF phase will allow the group to consider the effects on national and regional energy security of policies that promote regional energy interdependence relative to policies where relative to nations develop their energy systems based on largely independent, nationally-oriented interests.  At the end of this fourth phase of the project, the EAEF group will create a synthesizing report providing an analysis of and commentary on the regional scenario results.  The objective will be for the group to develop and speak with a clear single (consensus) voice whenever possible.  The end result of the project will be a readable and clear demonstration of the benefits of one or several types of regional scenarios of energy sector development in Northeast Asia, including a set of implied policy recommendations, if applicable.

3.                 Summary of the EAEF Framework Meeting, February 2001

The goals of the Framework Meeting, held in February 2001 at the Nautilus Institute in Berkeley, California, were to elaborate “a common research framework” for developing national energy scenarios and to discuss a set of “common analytical tools” for generation and evaluation of energy scenarios.  The analytical and conceptual approach elaborated in this meeting was also developed to ensure that the activities of EAEF phase three could serve as a foundation for scenario analysis at the regional level in the fourth phase of the project. 

The common research framework that will be used in ongoing and future phases of the EAEF project is designed to draw on aspects of the energy security framework developed and used as a part of another Nautilus project, the PARES project (as noted above).  The research framework also is designed to provide broad research directions as what kind of scenarios might be prepared and evaluated by each country group, to prepare and evaluate. Common analytical tools and methods used in this project will include the LEAP 2000 software, outlines for data collection and final reports, sample/initial data sets assembled by the Nautilus Institute, documents that provide guidance on building consistent data sets for each scenario, and guidance on approaches and methodologies for data collection. (Many of these tools and approaches were discussed in detail during the 5-day LEAP 2000 software training that followed the Framework Meeting.)

The first day of the Framework Meeting focused on the general methodology of scenario development, including how to use tools such as LEAP to quantify the feasibility of energy sector development scenarios, and how to support and evaluate scenarios in a quantitative way.  Nautilus also presented some ideas for potential focal topics that the group might choose to use as directions for collaborative research on energy paths, including regional grid interconnection, sustainable energy development, and climate change. These presentations were followed up by group discussion of these suggestions.  In the second day of the workshop, participants discussed individual country energy interests and priorities in order for the group to have a mutual understanding of the energy context of each individual country, as well as of the region as a whole.   Some participants also presented conceptual ideas for use as background in developing possible “optimized” national energy pathways.

3.1.            Methodology- Common Methods Energy Paths/Scenarios Development

Much of the methodology of the EAEF project will be based on a similar calculus developed under the PARES project. During the early part of framework meeting, David Von Hippel provided detailed background on and an explanation of the PARES project, and of the methodologies developed and used during the project.  A summary of the PARES project and its results are provided for reference here, as the PARES project provides a model for scenario development activities that are being conducted in phase three of the EAEF project.

 

The PARES Project explored and developed methodologies to analyze the impacts of energy-sector choices on energy security—using a broad definition of “energy security” —in the Pacific Asia region.  Initial analysis was applied to Japan – resulting in the development of an alternative energy scenario for Japan that would result in improved national energy security relative to a baseline or reference scenario.

 

PARES began by bringing together key officials and researchers in the region, mainly in Japan, to explore and elaborate new and comprehensive definitions of energy security.  The group also developed an analytical framework to evaluate the degree to which different energy "paths" would enhance or detract from energy security.  This first phase of the PARES project produced an inclusive concept of energy security that could provide a basis for safe, secure, and sustainable energy policies in Northeast Asia. 

 

The Japan case study of the PARES project examined the energy security implications of two different energy paths from 1995 to 2020: a "Business as Usual" path in which recent trends continue; and an "Alternative" path in which an aggressive policy effort accelerates implementation of energy efficiency, renewable energy, natural gas, and other relatively environmentally benign technologies. Table I provides a brief summary of assumptions and conditions upon which the scenarios developed for Japan in the PARES project are based. 

 

Table I.  Summary of Japan’s scenarios (PARES project)

 

National Energy Interests and Priorities

·         Energy security

·         Kyoto Protocol Target, Liberalization of Electricity Market

(Survival of nation, protection of welfare, minimize risk with fuel and services, environmental security, etc.)

 

Alternative energy path direction

·         Improved energy and environmental security

·         Regional energy security

 

Common Assumptions for both BAU and Alternative scenarios

·         Same level of energy service

·         Same future GDP growth rate and other measures of economic output

·         Same population and demographics conditions

·         Similar fractions of electricity generation supplied by nuclear reactors

BAU Scenario

·         Fossil fuels still the major fuel option

·         Modest energy efficiency and renewable energy technology implementation

·         More oil imports and oil transportation

·         Increases nuclear generation capacity as planned by the government

·