Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Industrial decarbonization under Japan’s national mitigation scenarios: a multi-model analysis

Industrial decarbonization under Japan’s national mitigation scenarios: a multi-model analysis Energy-intensive industries are difficult to decarbonize. They present a major challenge to the emerging countries that are currently in the midst of rapid industrialization and urbanization. This is also applicable to Japan, a developed economy, which retains a large presence in heavy industries compared to other developed economies. In this paper, the results obtained from four energy-economic and integrated assessment models were utilized to explore climate mitigation scenarios of Japan’s industries by 2050. The results reveal that: (i) Japan’s share of emissions from industries may increase by 2050, highlighting the difficulties in achieving industrial decarbonization under the prevailing industrial policies; (ii) the emission reduction in steelmaking will play a key role, which can be achieved by the implementation of carbon capture and expansion of hydrogen technologies after 2040; (iii) even under mitigation scenarios, electrification and the use of biomass use in Japan’s industries will continue to be limited in 2050, suggesting a low possibility of large-scale fuel switching or end-use decarbonization. After stocktaking of the current industry-sector modeling in integrated assessment models, we found that such limited uptake of cleaner fuels in the results may be related to the limited interests of both participating models and industry stakeholders in Japan, specifically the interests on the technologies that are still at the early stage of development but with high reduction potential. It is crucial to upgrade research and development activities to enable future industry-sector mitigation as well as to improve modeling capabilities of energy end-use technologies in integrated assessment models. Keywords Industry · Model intercomparison project · Nationally determined contribution · Japan Introduction th The 25 Conference of the Parties (COP25) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change reiter- ated the need for urgent action on climate change, stating the need for more efforts to achieve climate goals in order Handled by Shinichiro Fujimori, Kyoto University, Japan. to stabilize the global temperature rise at 1.5 °C by the end of the century (IPCC 2018). On the other hand, the bottom- * Yiyi Ju up approach of the Paris Agreement implied that policies juyiyi@ifi.u-tokyo.ac.jp should be developed based on the careful assessment of the Institute for Future Initiatives, University of Tokyo, unique situation of each country. For Japan, which prides Tokyo 113-0033, Japan itself on monozukuri (manufacturing) and retains a high Institute of Applied Energy, Tokyo, Japan share in heavy industries (METI 2020), this means that Institute of Energy Economics, Tokyo, Japan policies must address long-term decarbonization of the ind- sutry sector. The importance of industrial decarbonization Department of Environmental Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan has been mentioned in our previous paper (Sugiyama et al. 2019). Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Kanagawa, Japan Energy-intensive industries, such as steel and cement sectors, are extremely difficult to decarbonize in the short National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan Vol.:(0123456789) 1 3 412 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 run due to the increasing demand for industrial products Keidanren (Japan Business Federation) formulated its and subsidies from national strategies (Åhman et al. 2017), first voluntary action plan in 1998 termed Voluntary Action the time taken to update energy infrastructure (Davis et al. Plan for the Environment. The aim of this plan was to focus 2018), and the existence of process emissions (besides those on climate change mitigation after the Kyoto Protocol agree- from fuel combustion) and the need for high-temperatures. ment in 1997. The plan covered 38 industries, including This is particularly true for emerging countries that are in energy-intensive sectors, such as steel, cement, and machin- the midst of rapid industrialization and urbanization, such ery. After the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, as China, India, and Brazil (Fig. 1). it was renamed The Action Plan for the Low Carbon Society. Although Japan is a member of the Group of Seven (G7), Since 2008, evaluation of emission reduction has been con- the share of its industries in comparison with its total final ducted annually by a government committee and a third- energy consumption is much higher than the G7 average. In party committee. In the 2014 evaluation report (JBF 2014), fact, it is closer to the average of the Group of Twenty (G20), it was reported that JBF members contributed over 80% to which includes emerging economies. the total domestic industrial emissions and achieved a 5.6% The Government of Japan has taken numerous steps reduction in emissions, as compared to the 2005 level. to promote mitigation in the industry sector. The Plan for The Act on the Rational Use of Energy, also known as Global Warming Countermeasure (GoJ 2016) and the the Energy Conservation Law, was enacted in Japan in 1979 Intended Nationally Determined Contribution submitted to and was upgraded several times in order to respond to social United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change needs. It directly covered entities from the industry and (GoJ 2015) acknowledged the contribution of industries to transport sector and promoted an efficient energy manage- emission reduction since 2013 and has called for contin- ment system. The obligation of entities included a periodic ued efforts. The underlying principle is that climate change report on energy consumption, implementation of specified mitigation should not harm economic growth, but it should measures in the guidelines (adjustment of operating hours), simultaneously contribute to the achievement of other pol- and implementation of energy conservation measures (METI icy goals, such as economy, productivity, and added value 2013). growth (Long-Term Low-Carbon Vision, MOE 2016a; also Another major feature of the Act was to set energy effi- Long-Term Growth Strategy based on the Paris Agreement: ciency standards for various types of products, including Cabinet Decision, MOE 2019a). This approach has mostly appliances and vehicles. Accordingly, the Top Runner Pro- relied on voluntary action, especially of the Japan Business gram was executed, wherein standards were set according to Federation (JBF; Keidanren), and actions driven by Energy the level of the best performing products (top-runners) in the Conservation Law to improve energy efficiency. past years (METI 2015a). 31 products, including passenger Fig. 1 Sectoral shares of final energy consumption in differ - ent countries/regions. Source: summarized from IEA (2016), sorted according to the share of the industry sector 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 413 vehicles and air-conditioners have been covered under this of industries compared to the transport sector (Sugiyama program as of 2020. et  al. 2014). Among the 21 models that contributed to Of the various mitigation approaches, energy efficiency the IPCC’s report titled Global warming of 1.5 °C (IPCC has been the main priority, which has made Japan one of the 2018), an endogenous and explicit representation of the most energy efficient economies. The converse is that since electrification of transport demand (e.g., electric vehicles, there is a decreasing return to energy efficiency investments, electric rail) is observed in 17 models, while only 9 of Japan now has a limited, domestic energy conservation the 21 models focus on the electrification of industrial potential (IEA 2016; Kuramochi 2016). It, therefore, pushed energy demand (e.g., electric arc furnace, heat pumps, for international mechanisms, such as the Joint Crediting electric boilers, conveyor belts, extensive use of motor Mechanism (and the Clean Development Mechanism). In control, induction heating, and industrial use of microwave this, if a partner country installs an efficient, Japanese tech- heating). nology, emission reduction against the baseline is counted Meanwhile, previous analysis from a multi-model study as a credit. Furthermore, the Ministry of Environment also targeting Japan shows that the large-scale deployment of stated Japan’s financial and technical contributions to devel- low-carbon energy (such as nuclear, renewable, and carbon oping countries at the COP20 (MOE 2014). Moreover, Japan capture and storage) in the energy supply side is shared is promoting inter-industry and international cooperation across most of the 9 participating models in scenarios con- (MOE 2016b; MOE 2019b; METI 2019a). sistent with 1.5 or 2 degrees of global warming (Oshiro et al. Besides energy efficiency, other mitigation measures have 2019). Improving the value-added of industrial products is been explored for industries. Such measures include Carbon also suggested in a study proposing a roadmap towards a Capture and Storage (CCS), Carbon Capture, Utilization, low-carbon society in Japan (Ashina et al. 2012). In addition and Storage (CCUS; MOE 2008), introduction of renewables to such technology deployment in the energy supply side and into industrial production processes (JISF 2014), and the expectation of industrial structure changes, previous studies application and development of low-carbon products and also paid special attention to the diffusion of energy-efficient infrastructure (JBF 2019). For CCS, few demonstration pro- technologies in industries (Akashi 2012; Oda et al. 2007). jects have been conducted. Recently, the Tomakomai project However, such review summaries are scarce. To fill in such was completed with an injection of 300,000 t-CO (METI a gap, as the first multi-model analysis of industries in Japan, 2019b; IEA 2017a). For the introduction of hydrogen, the this paper further investigates the industry-related emissions COURSE50 project has been developed and is expected under different sets of climate policy, energy demand, and to reduce 30% of C O emissions in steelmaking industries technology scenarios, which contributes to a better under- (JISF 2014). standing of industrial decarbonization in Japan. Some price instruments are applicable to the industry sec- Given the different emphasis on mitigation measures tor too, though they tax by fossil fuel type and the stringency by different policies, namely energy saving, CCS, lower is weak (exemptions and refunds in certain raw material demand, and energy end-use technology changes, the aim industries, MOE 2014). Emission trading schemes (Tokyo of this paper was to answer the following research questions: market and Saitama market) started to work in force after 2010. It mainly targeted buildings and but also covered 580 How high would industrial energy consumption and emis- factories as liable entities (ICAP 2020a,2020b). However, sions go by 2050? How does it compare to other sectors, these were limited to only 2 out of the 47 prefectures of other historical periods of Japan, or reports from other Japan. model teams? Recent studies have identified new opportunities for What are the most important mitigation measures for the industrial mitigation. The proposed approaches include industry sector and its sub-sectors? improving material efficiency (Hertwich et al. 2019; UNIDO Can industrial decarbonization solely count on energy 2018; Grubler et al. 2018), negative emissions technologies saving? Does the industry sector in Japan need CCS? (IEA 2019; ICEF 2016), bridging technology gaps (UNIDO How well does low demand work? Will there be an 2016; Bataille et al. 2018), and increasing the uptake of increase in the uptake of clean energy carriers (elec- renewables in industries (IEA 2017b; McMillan et al. 2016). tricity, biomass, and hydrogen) in industries in the There is also interest in digitalization, such as artificial future? intelligence and internet of things. In Japan, the concept of Society 5.0 is used to describe a new, human-centric digital In addition, we ask the following modeling question: society (METI 2017; MOE 2016b). However, unlike the emphasis of policies and actions What is the status of industry-sector modeling in Japa- on the industry sector, in the model community, it seems nese energy-economic and integrated assessment models? that models are slow to include a detailed representation What should be expanded? 1 3 414 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 In this paper, the data from four energy-economic and 2016; Kuramochi et al. 2012). This scenario intends to integrated assessment models, AIM/Hub-Japan, AIM/ look at the impact of unavailability of this technology. Enduse-Japan, IEEJ_Japan 2017, and TIMES-Japan, were 26by30 + 80by50_LoDem: same as the NDC&MCS utilized to analyze the future scenarios of Japan’s industry scenario but with lower growth in GDP per-capita, by 2050, followed by a decomposition of emission changes based on SSP2. Research institutes in Japan generally based on the Kaya identity to investigate how Japan’s indus- assume lower expectations in GDP per-capita growth trial decarbonization would be driven. Based on our previous (Kuriyama et al. 2019), compared to the 1.7% per year work (Suguyama et al. 2019), this paper stock-takes of the growth from 2015 to 2030 that is assumed by Japan’s current industry-sector modeling also helps to clarify the NDC and MCS (METI 2015b). modeling status that is underway as well as the potential 26by30 + 80by50_LoDemInd: This scenario assumes improvements in the modeling of end-use technologies in that the energy service demand in the industry sector industries. will be further reduced by 50% by 2050. As the industry sector is identified as an important sector (Sugiyama et  al. 2019), reducing its service demand (Fujimori et al. 2014) may decrease the policy costs. The “50%” Methodology value underlines a range of possibilities that may lower the energy service demands in the future. Such a drop Participating models may happen intentionally due to improvements in mate- rial efficiency or final consumption preferences shifting The multi-model analysis is based on the Stanford Energy towards smart devices and low-carbon products. It can Modeling Forum (EMF) 35 Japan Model Intercomparison also occur unintentionally because of natural disasters, Project (JMIP). The participating models include AIM/Hub- global financial crises, pandemics, and similar extreme Japan, AIM/Enduse-Japan, IEEJ_Japan 2017, and TIMES- events (McCollum et al. 2020). In fact, in May 2020, Japan, wherein AIM/Hub-Japan is a general equilibrium the largest steelmaker in Japan, that is Nippon Steel, cut (GE) model and the rest are partial equilibrium (PE) models. down 30% of its capacity partly due to the COVID-19, The GE model AIM/Hub-Japan has price-elastic service which is almost the same level of capacity cuts during demands, while other partial equilibrium models follow the steel recession after 1985 Plaza agreement (Nikkei exogenous service demands. Considering such differences, 2020). the GE model is separated from the group of PE models in part of the following results. Other differences among mod- Population growth in all models follows the same els, such as the industrial energy coverage and its data, as assumption (the middle population projection by the well as the industrial emissions coverage and its data source, National Institute of Population and Social Security are listed in Table ESM i. Research, IPSS, 2017) under all scenarios. These four scenarios are selected from the whole set of scenarios in the EMF35 JMIP study as they cover almost Scenario design the entire range of results, at least with respect to the total final energy consumption of the industry sector and its The scenario design of EMF35 JMIP considers four dimen-energy-related CO emissions (see Fig. ESM i). sions: policy, technology, demand, and imports. A descrip- By looking at the variables under all the selected sce- tion of all these scenarios are listed in Sugiyama et al. (2021, narios (e.g., CO emissions from energy consumption this issue). This paper focuses on the following scenarios: of industries, final energy consumption of electricity by industries), the contribution of several important mitiga- Base_Def: the baseline scenario, left to the individual tion measures in the industry sector can be revealed. For modeling group’s choice, with no additional climate poli- example, the impacts of CCS can be shown by comparing cies and no other sub-regional emission reduction targets. results under 26by30 + 80by50_Def and 26by30 + 80by50_ 26by30 + 80by50_Def: the NDC&MCS scenario, where NoCCS. The impacts of lower demands can be shown the models apply Japan’s Nationally Determined Con- by comparing results under 26by30 + 80by50_Def and tribution (NDC, 26% emissions reduction by FY2030 26by30 + 80by50_LoDem/LoDemInd. Moreover, a fur- relative to the FY2013 levels) and Mid-Century Strategy ther Kaya decomposition can show the contribution of the (MCS, 80% emissions reduction by 2050). improvements in energy efficiency (by energy intensity 26by30 + 80by50_NoCCS: same as the NDC&MCS sce- factor), the energy end-use technology changes and indus- nario but without CCS deployment. CCS is considered as trial electrification (by energy intensity factor). a key mitigation technology in the industry sector (ICEF 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 415 factors, assuming that the contribution of each factor to the Decomposition of emission changes based on the Kaya identity interaction sum is equal. The change in CO emissions can be then decomposed into the sum of the contribution of four In this paper, decomposition of emission changes is con- factors, namely the contribution of population factor, C , the per-capita production factor, C , the energy intensity factor, ducted based on the Kaya identity (Ehrlich and Holdren 1971; Kaya 1990; Yamaji et al. 1991). The C O emissions C , and the emission intensity factor,C . e i in each sub-sector are decomposed into four factors, namely ΔEMS = C + C + C + C p d e i (4) population, per-capita production (production of the final product in that sub-sector), energy intensity, and emission By using the factor of energy intensity e as an example, intensity (Eq. 1): its contribution C can be formulated as PRD ENE EMS EMS = POP ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ = p ⋅ d ⋅ e ⋅ i, (1) C = p d Δei + Δpd Δei + p ΔdΔei + p d ΔeΔi POP PRD ENE e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 where EMS represents the C O emissions in each sub-sec- + ΔpΔdΔei + p ΔdΔeΔi +Δpd ΔeΔi 0 0 0 tor, POP represents the national population, PRD represents the production in each sub-sector, and ENE represents the + ΔpΔdΔeΔi final energy consumption in each sub-sector. Correspond- (5) ingly, p represents population, d represents per-capita pro- The unit and main final products of four selected sub- duction, e represents energy intensity of production, and i sectors are shown in Table 1. represents emission intensity. Considering their either high emission level/intensity Decomposition with n factors has n! unique decomposi- or difficulty of further emission abatement, the sub-sector tions; moreover, there are numerous ways to deal with non- cement, steel, pulp and paper, and chemicals reported by uniqueness. The refined Laspeyers decomposition (Ang participating model teams are included in this paper. 2000; Peters et  al, 2017) was utilized to ensure that the decomposition results had no residuals and that it satisfied the characteristics of time reversal, factor reversal, and zero- Sub‑sectoral technologies value robustness. The change in C O emissions between year t and year 0 can be decomposed to The main low-carbon technologies modeled in the selected industry sub-sectors in the participating models are listed EMS − EMS ΔEMS t 0 = in Table 2. EMS EMS 0 0 p +Δp d +Δd e +Δe i +Δi − p ⋅ d ⋅ e ⋅ i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EMS Results (2) and extended as Final energy of the industry sector in Japan ΔEMS =Δpd e i + p Δde i + p d Δei 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Figure 2 shows the key variable, final energy of the indus- + p d e Δi + …+ΔpΔde i +… (3) 0 0 0 0 0 try sector under two main scenarios, baseline (Base- +ΔpΔdΔei + …+ΔpΔdΔeΔi, line_Def) and NDC&MCS scenario (26% emissions reduction by 2030 and 80% emissions reduction by 2050, where the first four items have only one factor of change; 26by30 + 80by50_Def). the remaining items demonstrate the interaction of these Table 1 Representation of sub- Variable Unit Sectoral boundary sectors of the industry sector in Japan Production|Cement Mt/yr Manufacture of cement, lime, and plaster Production|Chemicals Original unit in Manufacture of basic chemicals, chemical products each model Production|Pulp and Paper Mt/yr Manufacture of paper and paper products, publish- ing, printing, and reproduction of recorded media Production|Steel Mt/yr Manufacture and casting of basic iron and steel The non-ferrous metals sector has a wide range of final products which are not reported in a same unit of energy service demand by all model teams, it is removed from sub-sector-level result figures 1 3 416 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 Table 2 H , Biomass, CCS, and other low-carbon industry technologies included in participating models Steel Cement Chemicals Pulp and Paper AIM/Hub-Japan EAF, CCS CCS Biomass for energy CCS AIM/Enduse-Japan EAF, CCS Biomass for energy CCS IEEJ_Japan 2017 EAF, CCS H Biomass for energy Hydrogen reduction, CCS TIMES-Japan EAF, CCS H meeting generic high-temperature heat Biomass for energy Hydrogen reduction, demands mixed with natural gas, CCS High temperature heat pump Electric Arc Furnace (EAF); H in IEEJ_Japan 2017 is based on imports; H2 in TIME-Japan can come from both domestic production and imports Fig. 2 Final energy of the industry sector in Japan since Models show different industry shares even for the base the variation of these PE models in base years, in the treat- year. This variation is partially explained by the difference in ment of external drivers, the coverage of industrial energy, the industrial energy coverage, emission coverage, and their and thus vary in the mitigation measures preferences in the databases used. Models use both the energy balance of the 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenario results. However, all PE International Energy Agency the comprehensive energy sta- models show a similar small gap between the Baseline_Def tistics compiled by METI. In fact, these databases disagree and 26by30 + 80by50_Def. Extra cut down of energy con- on the industry share of final energy (see Table ESM i in this sumption to achieve the NDC&MCS goal can be expected paper, and Sugiyama et al. (2021) for more on this point). as limited. Figure  2 shows the final energy of the industry sector The share of industry in Japan’s national final energy is from 2010 to 2050. Under the 80% reduction constraint, shown in Fig. 3. According to all PE models, around half of the long-term energy consumption varies among models, the total final energy consumption will be contributed by the even among all PE models. A 47.8% decline in 2050 can be industry sector if NDC&MCS goal is achieved, which is a observed in IEEJ_Japan 2017 compared to the 2010 level, high number given the context that G7 average in 2016 was similarly a 32.2% decline in AIM/Enduse-Japan, and a 6.9% 19.7% and OECD 21.7% (IEA, 2016). Moreover, the share decline in TIMES-Japan. Such variation can be caused by of the industry sector increases by 2050 in all PE models. In 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 417 Fig. 3 Long term changes of sectoral final energy in Japan under NDC&MDS scenario the GE model, this share decreases as the total final energy not perfectly comparable with EMF 35 JMIP scenarios, the consumption does not reduce as much as other PE models. results are still good references, as these models consider the To place Japan’s industry in a broader context, Fig.  4 position of Japan in the global economy, where less atten- presents the data from global models in the ADVANCE tion is paid in EMF 35 JMIP participating models. Based on project (Advanced Model Development and Validation for the global emission restrictions, global models give a lower the Improved Analysis of Costs and Impacts of Mitigation estimation of the final energy industry share. They reported Policies) in addition to the EMF 35 JMIP results. The gray the emission reduction rate in Japan’s industry sector in 2050 lines show the results of the industry’s share in final energy with a range of 35.6% (GCAM4.2_ADVANCEWP6) to from global model teams. Although the ADVANCE Syn- 58.3% (IMAGE 3.0, see Fig. ESM iii) compared to the 2010 thesis Scenario Database (version 1.0) was conducted ear- level, also less than the expectation of model teams from lier during 2013–2016, also the scenario 2030_Med2C is Japan (50.0% to 69.4% reduction). Given such conditions, Fig. 4 Ranges of industry’s share in final energy under selected source from ADVANCE Synthesis Scenario Database (version 1.0), scenarios: results from Japan and global models. Source: Regard- scenario 2030_Med2C (limit cumulative 2011–2100 CO2 emissions ing the results from EMF35 JMIP model teams, ribbons show the to 1600 GtCO2; more likely than not to stay below 2 °C; implement- ranges under main scenarios (Baseline_Def, 26by30 + 80by50_ ing without strengthening until 2030), project conducted during Def, 26by30 + 80by50_NoCCS) and lines show the value under 2013–2016. Industry’s share in final energy under more scenarios see 26by30 + 80by50_Def. Regarding the results from global models, Fig. ESM iii 1 3 418 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 the results from 3 of all 4 JMIP models show that the indus- implementation of CCS in industry largely varies among try’s share in Japan will stay still after 2020 and reach models. The 80% emission reduction by 2050 will be con- around 40 percent by 2050 and, still higher than the estima- tributed significantly by CCS, especially the CCS of fossil tion of the OECD average from IPCC AR5 (Sugiyama et al. fuels according to the results from AIM/Hub-Japan and 2019). Compared to these reference models from institutions AIM/Enduse-Japan. On the other hand, more implementa- other than Japan, JMIP PE models show higher results in the tion of CCS does not seem very necessary to achieve the final energy industry share (among which the highest 59.5% NDC-MCS goal according to the results from IEEJ_Japan under 26by30 + 80by50_Def, from TIMES-Japan), closer to 2017 and TIMES-Japan, among which a certain share of the world average rather than OECD countries. emissions generated from industry-related activities would be captured in TIMES-Japan. CO emissions generated from the industry sector Regarding which sector would cut down more emis- in Japan sions, in half of the participating models (AIM/Enduse- Japan and TIMES-Japan), the transportation sector shows The corresponding CO emissions of the industry sector a larger potential in the emission reduction with lower under the baseline and the 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenarios marginal costs, and its absolute number of reduction are shown in Fig. 5. The variable shows the sum emissions exceeds the industry sector. In the other half of the mod- generated from the energy use in the industry sector and els (AIM/Hub-Japan and IEEJ_Japan 2017), a larger bur- from industrial processes. den of emission mitigation will go to the industry sector, Compared to the final energy of the industry sector in shown as a reduction in industry’s annual emissions over- Fig. 2, the variations in CO emissions among models are weighs others. No matter to which sector such priority of smaller. Under the 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenario, an 83.4% emission reduction burden would go, the results of JMIP emission reduction in the industry sector in 2050 can be suggest that annual CO emission in the industry sector observed in AIM/Hub-Japan compared to the 2010 level, should at least cut around 150 Mt in 2050 compared to similarly a 69.4% decline in AIM/Enduse-Japan, a 60.8% the 2010 level. How such a cut will be achieved, namely decline in IEEJ_Japan 2017, and a 50.0% decline in TIMES- to what extent fuel switching in industries works, which Japan. To reach an 80% emission reduction goal in total for sub-sectors should decarbonize more, or other mitigation all sectors, model teams have different expectations of the measures that have not been decently modeled in this pro- emissions reduction efforts of industries. ject, would be investigated in the next sections. Among all Similar to the structure of sectoral final energy, the participating models, the GE model shows the largest net industry sector occupies the largest share of demand- emission reduction in the industry sectors. side total emissions in all PE models (See Fig.  6). The Fig. 5 CO emissions of the industry sector in Japan since 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 419 Fig. 6 Long term changes of sectoral CO emissions in Japan and the contribution of carbon sequestration under NDC&MCS scenario According to PE models, the industry sector may still Decomposition by source rely on the energy consumption of solids in 2050, which is a relatively larger share compared to other sectors. The decomposition of the industry’s final energy by source Among such decomposition of consumption, only around is shown in Fig. 7, compared with the same decomposition 10% will be biomass, and the rest still coal. Moreover, in other sectors. all PE models report very similar results of the industrial Fig. 7 Industry’s contribution to the reduction in annual demand-side emissions under NDC&MCS scenario 1 3 420 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 electrification level. Under the NDC&MCS scenario, the position of steelmaking decarbonization to the achievement share of electricity consumption in the industry sector of Japan’s NDC&MDS goal. will remain at a relatively low level and slightly increase The sub-sectoral CO emissions under more scenarios during 2010–2050. Factors determining such an electri- also see Fig. ESM ii. The selected scenarios can examine the fication rate are numerous and would need to be analyzed impacts of two mitigation measures in the industry sector, separately in each sector (Sakamoto et  al. 2021). The CCS and lower energy service demands. Both final energy modeling of electricity technologies in industries (e.g., and CO emissions are reported as the lowest value under electric arc furnaces in steelmaking, or more generally LoDemInd scenarios among all scenarios in nearly all sub- the use of electricity to meet industrial heat demands), as sectors and models. In the steel sub-sector, around 50–60 well as the price and changes in prices of such electric- Mt emissions will be reduced (compared to the baseline ity technologies, may affect the result of electrification scenario) by halving steelmaking’s energy service demand. rate. Furthermore, the large-scale introduction of elec- The other mitigation measure, CCS, is modeled in the tricity-based facilities may sharply increase the industrial steel and cement sub-sectors in all participating models. In electricity consumption and exert more pressure on the AIM/Enduse-Japan, the emission of steelmaking would be electricity supply. However, the manner in which energy much higher under the 26by30 + 80by50_NoCCS scenario service demands react to such changes with respect to than under the 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenario, especially the availability of energy supply cannot be solved simul- after 2030. Such a difference indicates the importance of taneously in PE models with exogenous energy service CCS to the decarbonization of steelmaking in AIM/Enduse- demands. On the other hand, the switch from fossil fuels Japan. In TIMES-Japan and IEEJ_Japan 2017, the emis- to hydrogen in industries is less costly in terms of system sion of steelmaking under the 26by30 + 80by50_NoCCS mortification, such as fewer changes in sensors, controls, scenario would be lower or nearly the same under the and labor skills (ICEF, 2019). However, its introduction 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenario, indicating the limited con- in the industry sector will be limited according to Fig. 7. tribution of CCS in steelmaking decarbonization in these Overall, according to the results from PE models, the rise two models. The emission reduction would be achieved by in the electrification rate and the introduction of biomass the introduction of hydrogen technologies in steelmaking use in industries by 2050 will still be limited, suggesting in TIMES-Japan (after 2040, shown in Fig. 7). While in the a low possibility of large-scale fuel switching or end-use cement sub-sector, a larger impact of CCS can be observed technology substitution in production processes in Japan. in TIMES-Japan. How industries can benefit from an increasingly low-carbon Considering the key role of steelmaking, a decomposition energy supply remains a pressing issue. considering more scenarios is conducted in this sub-sector, shown in Fig.  10. The decomposition reveals how much Decomposition by sub‑sector each factor, namely changes in final demands for industrial products, energy efficiency improvement, and emission Cement, chemicals, pulp and paper, steel, the final energy intensity reduction, would contribute to the changes of sub- and CO emissions of the four selected industry sub-sectors sectoral emission (results of all sub-sectors see Fig. ESM v). are shown in Fig. 8. According to the results, the contribution of emission inten- The gap of sub-sectoral final energy between NDC&MCS sity (green bar) will overweigh the contribution of energy and baseline scenarios is small in all sub-sectors except efficiency (blue bar) after 2030, especially in the steel and steel, so is the gap of sub-sectoral CO emissions. The cement sub-sector. potentials of both emission reduction and energy conser- From the temporal perspective, two of the three models vation of these sub-sectors would be limited. On the other report that significant emission reductions in the steel sector hand, sub-sectoral final energy and CO emissions do not may occur from 2040 to 2050, instead of a continuous reduc- share a similar structure. In the cement sub-sector, the high tion after 2020. From the perspective of factors, the impact emission intensity and the large number of emissions would of emission intensity factor would concentrate in the period be generated from production processes, shown as a small 2040–2050, while the energy efficiency factor would keep share in final energy and a larger share in CO emissions. functioning from 2020, which is along with the decomposi- As mentioned in Fig. 9, annual C O emission in the industry tion result of all sub-sectors. sector should at least cut around 150 Mt in 2050, among Regarding the contribution of energy efficiency improve- which around 100 Mt cut would be the mission of the steel ment, its effect on emission reduction is significant during sub-sector. A large share in final energy and a larger share 2020–2040 in IEEJ_Japan 2017, while it is smaller, but still in CO emissions, together with such a large gap between exists, in TIMES-Japan during the whole period. In AIM/ emission levels in 2050 and 2010, again emphasized the key Enduse-Japan, the contribution of would be lower in the period 2040–2050 due to the introduction of more CCS. 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 421 Fig. 8 Sectoral final energy by source under NDC&MCS scenario. Notes: the decomposition by source under more scenarios in 2050 see Fig. ESM iv Models hold different views but all agree that even if there 2019).The long-term expectation of the production of steel is no CCS implemented, the steelmaking decarbonization also considers global assumptions (Nameki and Moriguchi cannot count on energy saving after 2040. Regarding the 2014) that may affect total domestic production, as well as contribution of emission intensity reduction, it is reported the potential of recyclable scraps (Kawase and Matsuoka in IEEJ_Japan 2017 that certain contributions would exist 2015) that may affect the introduction of EAF capacity. The throughout the whole period, in TIMES-Japan mainly after estimation of AIM/Enduse-Japan and TIMES-Japan shows 2030, and in AIM/Enduse-Japan huge contributions only that steel production may slightly but steadily increase, concentrated in the period 2040–2050. As mentioned, this while this growth may cease in 2020, drop steadily after- is a reflection of the CCS implementation in AIM/Enduse- ward, and lead to the reduction in emissions in IEEJ_Japan Japan and the more introduction of hydrogen technologies 2017. All models report the largest emission mitigation after 2040 in TIMES-Japan. led by a reduction in production under the low industry Regarding the contribution of final product demand demand scenario in nearly all periods. Such reduction changes from 2010 to 2016, the decrease in production vol- would ease the pressure of energy conservation, although ume has not been as significant as other industrial materials TIMES-Japan reports that such a decrease in steel demand such as non-ferrous metals and cement (Oda and Akimoto and the decarbonization by such lower demand would not 1 3 422 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 Fig. 9 Sub-sectoral industry’s final energy (a) and CO emissions emissions in b only track emissions from energy sources and do not (b) by sub-sector under NDC&MCS scenario. Notes: the decompo- include emissions generated from industrial processes (except the sition by subsector under more scenarios in 2050 see Fig. ESM vi; steel sub-sector in TIMES-Japan) Fig. 10 Decomposition of emission changes based on the Kaya identity: the steel sub-sector. Notes: the decomposition results of all sub-sectors see ESM v continue after 2040. Moreover, the marginal abatement Discussion cost of C O emissions would be the lowest under the low industry demand scenario, followed by the building sector Robust assessment of long-term decarbonization of the and the transportation sector (the results of carbon price industry sector relies on consideration of prospect low see Fig. ESM vii). carbon technologies. This multi-model analysis revealed 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 423 key limitations and aspects to improve such assessment in the current status and future deployment of CCS capac- in terms of the coverage of decarbonization technolo- ity, it is essential to stimulate early investments in steel and gies. CCS is applicable in all the participating models, cement sub-sectors. Such investment can be supported by whereas the hydrogen technologies in steelmaking are only targeted policy instruments such as tax credits or market- included in some models. The use of biomass as fuel or based schemes. Before these steps are taken, there should be feedstock in the chemical sub-sector is not included in all public awareness of carbon capture’s necessity and the estab- the participating models. These limitations are barriers to lishment of a grand design that focuses on the type of CCUS the representation of fuel switching in the industry sector. technologies that should be introduced in specific sectors (as Moreover, the performance of mitigation measures other discussed in an early stage in the Study Group for Innovative than energy conservation in the future industries cannot Environmental Innovation Strategy, METI 2019c), both of be revealed if the currently unmatured technologies have which require efforts from the modeling communities. not been modeled in the first place. Widening the range Figure 4 compares the Japanese and global IAM results of end-use technologies and devices may greatly improve with the industry’s share in the final energy consumption. the modeling of IAMs. Table 3 shows the steelmaking and Although an analysis of the reasons that lead to such dif- cement technologies worldwide, in the EU, in Japan, and ferences between the Japanese and global IAM results was in all participating models. conducted in this paper, such differences re-emphasize the Although the technology development in industries has necessity of model intercomparison projects (van Sluisveld been included in some reports in Japan (NEDO 2018; METI et al. 2019). Policymakers will have a more holistic view of 2019c), the range of the categories of current technologies/ the models have better access to parameters of local activi- practices in Japan is smaller than that of the EU, and even ties and a better understanding of global networks. Regard- smaller when represented in JMIP IAMs. According to the ing the sensitivity of scenario parameters, the ranges of the mitigation scenarios for the steel industry conducted by the key variables (i.e., industrial final energy) under demand Japan Iron and Steel Federation, hydrogen-reduction, CCS, scenarios and policy scenarios are shown in Fig. ESM vii. and CCU are included in the most optimistic scenario by the steel industry (JISF 2019). However, technologies with low technology readiness levels but high reduction potential, Conclusion such as aqueous (e.g., developed during the project SID- ERWIN) and molten oxide electrolysis (e.g., developed by In this paper, the data from four energy economic and inte- Boston Metals) in steelmaking, electrification of the cal - grated assessment models were utilized to explore climate ciner (e.g., developed during the project LEILAC), and mitigation scenarios of Japan’s industry by 2050, including magnesium or ultramafic cement in cement-making has not its final energy and CO emissions, their long term changes attracted large-scale interests of either participating models and structures, as well as the impacts of several industrial or industry stakeholders in Japan. The modeling of such sub- mitigation measures. This was followed by a decomposition sectors in a wider range of periods, such as by 2100, is also of emission changes based on the Kaya identity to investi- worth considering. gate what how Japan’s industrial decarbonization would be Also, the uptake of hydrogen, specifically the direct driven. The results show that: reduced iron technology has not been included in all model The industry sector dominates Japan’s total final energy teams. Recently, three main producer companies in Japan consumption. By 2050, its share will increase in all the par- and two in Europe have raised their total investment in coal- tial equilibrium models, further indicating the difficulty in free steelmaking technologies, reaching 264.7 billion yen achieving industrial decarbonization by improving energy in 2019, an 14% increase compared to the 2015 level (Nik- efficiencies. The general equilibrium model shows the larg- kei 2020). In our future works, another set of NoHydrogen est net emission reduction in the industry sector. These scenarios will help investigate the contribution of hydrogen results of JMIP suggest that, in order to achieve the Nation- introduction in energy demand sectors. ally Determined Contribution and Mid-Century Strategy th So far, over 3/4 of the C O capture capacity that has goal of Japan, a large cut in the annual C O emission in 2 2 been built in the past decade and that is currently opera- the industry sector would be inevitable. Compared to other tional worldwide is in low-cost processes (such as hydrogen sectors, the industry sector may still rely on solids in 2050, production-related processes, gas processing, etc.) instead as raw materials in production as well as fuels to meet the of industries, wherein the capture and use of C O would be industrial heat demand. Under the mitigation scenarios, the economically and technically challenging (IEA 2019). In rise in the electrification rate and the introduction of biomass Japan’s industries, CCS has been regarded as a technocratic use in industries will still be limited (electrification rate up to approach that fully relies on consensus among political elites around 30% in all PE models), suggesting a low possibility and experts (Asayama and Ishii 2014). To bridge the gap 1 3 424 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 1 3 Table 3 Modeling of industry technologies in IAMs: in steel and in cement sub-sector Technologies worldwide GHG reduction potential TRL Technologies (under development Technologies (under development Technologies covered by JMIP (steel sub-sector) included) in EU included) in Japan participating models Current EAF (depends on Up to 99% All electricity intensity) BF-BOF w/ top gas recirculation & 60% High Advanced direct reduction with CCS; CCUS (recovery/recycling from All CCUS (Leeson et al. 2017; Axelson EC 2013) byproduct gases; JISF 2019) et al. 2018; Birat 2011) HIsarna with concentrated CCUS 80–90% Medium HIsarna (CCS; EECRsteel 2011) Ferro-coke process (NEDO 2019) (Axelson et al. 2018) Hydrogen direct reduced iron 99% Medium Hydrogen direct reduced iron Internal hydrogen (JISF 2019) IEEJ_Japan 2017, TIMES-Japan (Fischedick et al., 2014; Vogl et al., 2018) Aqueous and Molten Oxide electrolysis 99% Low Electrolysis process (EC 2013) (Axelson et al., 2018; Fischedick et al., 2014) Technologies worldwide GHG reduction potential TRL Technologies (under development Technologies (under development Technologies covered by JMIP (cement sub-sector) included) in EU included) in Japan participating models Clinker substitution (e.g., lime- 40–50% High Further reduction of clinker content Improve efficiency All stone + calcined clays) (ECRA 2017) (cooler, kiln, preheater, etc.; JCA 2013) Alternative lower GHG fuels (e.g., 40% High Alternative fuels, Fuel switching, Alternative fuels and waste heat recov- All waste biofuels and hydrogen) waste heat recovery ery (JCA 2013) (steam, ORC, Kalina Cycle; ECRA 2017) CCUS for process heating & Calcina- 99% calc., Medium Post-combustion capture Calcination-carbonation cycle All tion-carbonation cycle (Moore 2017; < = 90% heat Leeson et al. 2017) Electrification of the calciner (Hills 60% Medium et al. 2016, 2017) Magnesium or ultramafic cements Can be negative Low (Lehne and Preston 2018; Scrivener et al. 2018; Gartner and Sui, 2017) Notes: Technology readiness level (TRL). For the steel sub-sector, the current global average emission intensity is 1.83 tC O -eq/t (Worldsteel 2019); the details of more conventional mitigation measures (e.g., coke dry quechning, top pressure recovery turbine, etc.) are not included in this table. For the cement sub-sector, the current global average emission intensity is 0.55 tCO -eq/t (ECRA 2017); the details of more conventional mitigation measures (e.g., pre-heaters) are not included in this table. Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 425 the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not of large-scale fuel switching or end-use technology revolu- permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will tion in production processes in Japan. need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a Regarding the mitigation measure energy saving, the con- copy of this licence, visit http://creativ ecommons .or g/licenses/b y/4.0/. tribution of emission intensity reduction to the industrial decarbonization will overweigh the contribution of energy efficiency improvement after 2030, especially in the steel References sub-sector and cement sub-sector. Decarbonization in steel- making would be key to the achievement of Japan’s national Åhman M, Nilsson LJ, Johansson B (2017) Global climate policy and deep decarbonization of energy-intensive industries energy- emission reduction goal. Such a cut in steelmaking can be intensive industries, 3062. Doi: https ://doi.org/10.1080/14693 achieved by the implementation of CCS or more introduc- 062.2016.11670 09 tion of hydrogen technologies after 2040. Decarbonization Akashi O, Hijioka Y, Masui T, Hanaoka T, Kainuma M (2012) GHG in steelmaking cannot count on extra energy conservation emission scenarios in Asia and the world: the key technologies for signic fi ant reduction. Energy Econ 34(SUPPL. 3):S346–S358. after 2040. Low demand for energy services in the industry https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco .2012.04.011 sector may largely decrease the marginal abatement cost of Ang BW (2000) A survey of index decomposition analysis in energy CO emissions (Sugiyama et al. 2021). and environmental studies. Energy 25:1149–1176 Stocktaking of the current modeling practice helps us see Asayama S, Ishii A (2014) Media representations and governance of CCS: framings and policy implications of Japanese newspaper’s the limitation of how the current modeling investigates the coverage. Soc Tech Res Essay Collect 11:127–137. https ://doi. crucial concerns of industries in Japan. A wider range of org/10.3392/socio techn ica.11.127 end-use technologies and devices, including technologies Ashina S, Fujino J, Masui T, Ehara T, Hibino G (2012) A roadmap with low technology readiness levels, can be considered as towards a low-carbon society in Japan using backcasting meth- odology: Feasible pathways for achieving an 80% reduction in alternative options in energy-related integrated assessment CO emissions by 2050. Energy Policy 41:584–598. https://doi. models that are highly encouraged. The discussion in this org/10.1016/j.enpol .2011.11.020 paper also leads to more research questions, such as how Axelson M, Robson I, Khandekar G, Wyns T (2018) Breaking industries can benefit from increasingly low-carbon energy through: Industrial Low-CO Technologies on the Horizon. 92. www.ies.be/Break ing-Throu gh_Repor t_13072 018 supply, or to support such a transition in energy supply, Bataille C, Åhman M, Neuhoff K, Nilsson LJ, Fischedick M, Lech- how would the demand for industrial products and services tenböhmer S et al (2018) A review of technology and policy change. deep decarbonization pathway options for making energy- intensive industry production consistent with the Paris Agree- Supplementary Information The online version contains supplemen- ment. J Clean Prod 187:960–973. https://doi.or g/10.1016/j.jclep tary material available at https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11625-02 1-00905-2 . ro.2018.03.107 Birat J (2011) The sustainability footprint of steelmaking. Steel Times Int 35:42 Acknowledgments This research was supported by the Environment Davis SJ, Lewis NS, Shaner M, Aggarwal S, Arent D, Azevedo IL Research and Technology Development (JPMEERF20172004) of et al (2018) Net-zero emissions energy systems. Science. https the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. ://doi.org/10.1126/scien ce.aas97 93 MS and YJ were also supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number ECRA (European Cement Research Academy, 2017). CSI/ECRA- JP20H04395. KO was also supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Num- technology papers 2017: development of state of the art tech- ber JP20K14860, the Environmental Research and Technology Devel- niques in cement manufacturing: trying to look ahead. http:// opment Fund (JPMEERF20201002) of the Environmental Restoration docs.wbcsd .or g/2017/06/CSI_ECRA_T ec hn ology _P aper and Conservation Agency of Japan. DSH was supported by Strategic s_2017.pdf Operation Fund and Strategic Research Fund of IGES, and by Environ- EECRstee. (2011) Proceedings of the first international conference on ment Research and Technology Development (JPMEERF20201002) energy efficiency and CO reduction in the steel industry, HIsarna of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. Pilot Plant Project, Meijer, K., Guenther, C., Dry, R.J., 27 June to 1 July 2011, Dusseldorf, 2011. Author contributions MS and JY conceived of the study. DSH, EK, Ehrlich PR, Holdren JP (1971) Impact of population growth. Obstet KO, and YM conducted model runs. JY produced figures. JY and Gynecol Surv 26(11):769. https ://doi.or g/10.1097/00006 254- MS wrote the manuscript, which was edited and approved by all the 19711 1000-00014 authors. European Commission (2013) Technology map of the european strate- gic energy technology plan (SET-Plan). https ://ec.europ a.eu/jrc/ en/print pdf/15540 2 Fischedick M, Marzinkowski J, Winzer P, Weigel M (2014) Techno- Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- economic evaluation of innovative steel production technolo- bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta- gies. J Clean Prod 84:563–580. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclep tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long ro.2014.05.063 as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, Fujimori S, Kainuma M, Masui T, Hasegawa T, Dai H (2014) The provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes effectiveness of energy service demand reduction: a scenario were made. The images or other third party material in this article are analysis of global climate change mitigation. Energy Policy included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated 75:379–391. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol .2014.09.015 otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in 1 3 426 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 Gartner E, Sui T (2017) Alternative cement clinkers. Cem Concr Res. JCA (2014) Low carbon society action plan phase II (cement industry). https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemco nres.2017.02.002http://www.jcass oc.or.jp/cemen t/4pdf/jg1k_03.pdf GoJ (Government of Japan, 2015). Submission of Japan’s intended JISF (Japan Iron and Steel Federation) (2014) Low carbon society nationally determined contribution (INDC). http://www4. action plan phase II (iron and steel industry). https ://www.jisf. unfcc c.int/submi ssion s/INDC/ Published%20Documents/or.jp/busin ess/ondan ka/kouke n/keika ku/docum ents/14111 2.pdf Japan/1/20150717_Japan’s%20INDC.pdf. JISF (2019) Long-term vision for climate change mitigation A chal- GoJ (2016) The plan for global warming countermeasure. http://www. lenge towards zero-carbon steel, 2019. http://www.jisf.or.jp/busin env.go.jp/press /files /jp/10281 6.pdf [in Japanese]ess/ondan ka/zeroc arbon steel / Grubler A, Wilson C, Bento N, Boza-kiss B, Krey V, Mccollum DL Kawase R, Matsuoka Y (2015) Steel production estimation in Japan et al (2018) A low energy demand scenario for meeting the 15 °C with considering global market, Proceedings of the Civil Engi- target and sustainable development goals without negative emis- neering Society (Environment), vol 71, No. 5, I_383–394. https: // sion technologies. Nat Energy. https ://doi.or g/10.1038/s4156 www.jstag e.jst.go.jp/artic le/jscej er/71/5/71_I_383/_pdf 0-018-0172-6 Kaya Y (1990) Impact of carbon dioxide emission control on GNP Hertwich EG, Coauthors. (2019) Material efficiency strategies to growth: interpretation of proposed scenarios. In: paper presented reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with buildings, to the IPCC energy and industry subgroup, response strategies vehicles, and electronics—a review. Environ Res Lett. https :// working group. doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0fe 3 Kuramochi T, Ramírez A, Turkenburg W, Faaij A (2012) Compara- Hills TP, Sceats M, Rennie D, Fennell P (2017) LEILAC: Low cost tive assessment of CO capture technologies for carbon-intensive CO capture for the cement and lime industries. Energy procedia, industrial processes. Prog Energy Combust Sci 38(1):87–112. vol 114. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 6166–6170https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2011.05.001 Hills T, Leeson D, Florin N, Fennell P (2016) Carbon capture in the Kuramochi T (2016) Assessment of midterm C O emissions reduction cement industry: technologies, progress, and retrofitting. Environ potential in the iron and steel industry : a case of Japan. J Clean Sci Technol 50:368–377. https://doi.or g/10.1021/acs.est.5b03508 Prod 132:81–97. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclep ro.2015.02.055 ICAP (International Carbon Action Partnership) (2020a) Japan— Kuriyama A, Tamura K, Kuramochi T (2019) Can Japan enhance its saitama target setting emissions trading system. https://icapcar- 2030 greenhouse gas emission reduction targets? Assessment bonaction.com/en/?option=com_etsmap&task=export&format= of economic and energy-related assumptions in Japan’s NDC. pdf&layout=list&systems[]=84 Energy Policy 130(April):328–340. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . ICAP (2020b) Japan—Tokyo cap-and-trade program. https://icapcar-enpol .2019.03.055 bonaction.com/en/?option=com_etsmap&task=export&format= LANDES (2011) Product details of CO -SUICOM. https://www .lande pdf&layout=list&systems[]=51s.co.jp/produ ct/113 ICEF (Innovation for Cool Earth Forum) (2016) ICEF innovation Leeson D, Fennell P, Shah N, Petit C, Mac Dowell N (2017) A Techno- roadmap 1.0: CO utilization and ZEB/ZEH roadmaps released economic analysis and systematic review of carbon capture and at COP22. https ://www .icef-for um .or g/platf or m/ar tic le_de t ai storage (CCS) applied to the iron and steel, cement, oil refining l.php?artic le__id=109 and pulp and paper industries. Int J Greenh Gas Control 61:71–84. IEA (International Energy Agency) (2016) World energy balances https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc .2017.03.020 2016. OECD Publishing, Paris. https ://doi.org/10.1787/97892 Lehne J, Preston F (2018) Making concrete change innovation in low- 64263 116-en carbon cement and concrete. Chatham House Rep. https ://doi. IEA (2017a) Energy technology perspectives 2017—executive sum-org/10.1088/1742-6596/1015/3/03216 3 mary. International Energy Agency (IEA) Publications, 371. Doi: Mccollum DL, Gambhir A, Rogelj J, Wilson C (2020) Energy mod- https ://doi.org/10.1787/energ y_tech-2014-en ellers should explore extremes more. Nat Energy. https ://doi. IEA (2017) Renewable Energy for Industry: From green energy to org/10.1038/s4156 0-020-0555-3 green materials and fuels. OECD Publishing, Paris. https ://doi. McMillan C, Boardman R, McKellar M, Sabharwall P, Ruth M, Bragg- org/10.3138/97814 87595 753-006 Sitton S (2016) Generation and use of thermal energy in the US IEA (2019) Tracking industry, IEA, Paris https ://www.iea.org/repor industrial sector and opportunities to reduce its carbon emissions. ts/track ing-indus try METI (Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry) (2013) Japan’s pol- IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2014) Fifth icy on energy conservation. https://enek en.ieej.or .jp/data/4746.pdf assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate METI (2015a) Top runner program: developing the world’s best energy change. Cambridge University Press 2014. https ://www.ipcc.ch/ efficient appliance and more. 2015. https ://www .enec h o.me ti. site/asset s/uploa ds/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_full.pdfgo.jp/categ ory/savin g_and_new/savin g/data/topru nner2 015e.pdf IPCC (2018) Proposed outline of the special report in 2018 on the METI (2015b) Chouki enerugi jyukyu mitoshi (long-term energy out- impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels look, in Japanese). The subcommittee on long-term energy supply and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the con- and demand outlook. https ://www.enech o.meti.go.jp/commi ttee/ text of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate counc il/basic _polic y_subco mmitt ee/mitos hi/pdf/repor t_01.pdf cha. IPCC - Sr15, 2(October), 17–20. www.enviro nment algra phit METI (2016) Long-term global warming counter measure platform i.org (Choki Chikyu Ondanka Taisaku Prattohommu). http://www.meti. IPSS (2017) Population Projections for Japan (2017): 2016 to 2065. go.jp/press /2017/04/20170 41400 6/20170 41400 6-1.pdf. National Institute of Population and Social Security Research METI (2017) Connected industries Tokyo initiative 2017, https://www . JBF (Japan Business Federation) (2019). KEIDANREN’s commitment meti.go.jp/policy/mono_inf o_service/conne cted_indus tr ies/inde x to a low carbon society fiscal 2018 follow-up results. https://www . .html keida nren.or.jp/polic y/vape.html METI (2018) Fifth energy basic plan. https ://www.enech o.meti.go.jp/ JBF (2014) Low carbon society action plan independent evaluation categ ory/other s/basic _plan/#head committee evaluation report. https ://www.keida nren.or.jp/polic METI (2019a) 2018 annual report on energy (energy white paper), y/2015/039.pdfhttps ://www.enech o.meti.go.jp/about /white paper / JCA (Japan Cement Association) (2013) Cement industry’s efforts to METI (2019b) Large-scale CCS Demonstration Project in Hokkaido combat global warming. http://www.jcass oc.or.jp/seisa nkank yo/ Prefecture, Successfully Injects 300,000 Tons of CO2 cumula- seisa n02/pdf/seisa n02_01.pdf tively, https://www .meti.go.jp/english/pr ess/2019/1125_004.html 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 427 METI (2019c) Innovative Environmental Innovation Strategy. https Sakamoto S, Nagai Y, Sugiyama M et al (2021) End-use decarboniza- ://www.meti.go.jp/shing ikai/energ y_envir onmen t/kanky o_innov tion and electrification: EMF 35 JMIP study. Sustain Sci. ation /003.html Scrivener KL, John VM, Gartner EM (2018) Eco-efficient cements: METI (2020) 2019 Manufacturing white paper (annual report based potential economically viable solutions for a low-CO on article 8 of the basic act on the promotion of basic manufac- cement-based materials industry. Cem Concr Res. https ://doi. turing technology). https ://www .me ti.go.jp/r epor t/white paper /org/10.1145/23702 16.23702 32 mono/2019/index .html Sugiyama M, Akashi O, Wada K, Kanudia A, Li J, Weyant J (2014) MOE (Ministry of the Environment) (2007) Keynote speech by ichiro Energy efficiency potentials for global climate change mitiga- kamoshita, minister of the environment of Japan. 2007. https :// tion. Clim Change 123(3e4):397. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1058 www.env.go.jp/earth/g8/en/mee ting/img/K eynote%20Spe ec h%20 4-013-0874-5 by%20Ichir o%20Kamoshit a%20in%20t he%20Ses sion%20on%20 Sugiyama M, Fujimori S, Wada K et al (2019) Japan’s long-term cli- Cli mate%20Cha nge.pdf mate mitigation policy: multi-model assessment and sectoral chal- MOE (2008) Action plan for creating a low-carbon society. http://www. lenges. Energy 167(2019):1120–1131. https ://doi.org/10.1016/J. env.go.jp/press /file_view.php?seria l=11912 &hou_id=10025 ENERG Y.2018.10.091 MOE (2014) Tax to combat global warming. https ://www.env.go.jp/ Sugiyama M, Fujimori S, Wada K, Oshiro K, Kato E, Komiyama R, polic y/tax/faq.html Silva Herran D, Matsuo Y, Shiraki H, Ju Y (2021) EMF 35 JMIP MOE (2016a) Long-term, low-carbon vision. http:// www.env.go.jp/ study for Japan’slong-term climate and energy policy: scenario press /10382 2/10547 8.pdf designs and key findings. Sustain Sci MOE (2016b) global warming countermeasures plan (Japanese Cabinet UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization) (2016). Decision). https ://www.env.go.jp/press /10251 2.html Industrial development report 2016: the role of technology and MOE (2019a) Long-term growth strategy based on the Paris Agree- innovation in inclusive and sustainable industrial development. ment, https ://www.env.go.jp/press /10686 9.html UNIDO. https ://www .unido .or g/sites /def au lt/f iles /2015-12/ MOE (2019b) 2018 annual report on environment (environment white EBOOK _IDR20 16_FULLR EPORT _0.pdf paper), http://www.env.go.jp/polic y/hakus yo/ UNIDO (2018). Industrial development report 2018. Demand for Moore J (2017) Thermal hydrogen: an emissions free hydrocarbon manufacturing: driving inclusive and sustainable industrial devel- economy. Int J Hydrogen Energy 42:12047–12063. https ://doi. opment. https ://www.unido .org/resou rces-publi catio ns-flags hip- org/10.1016/j.ijhyd ene.2017.03.182publicatio ns-indus tr ial-de velopmen t-r eport-ser ies/indus tr ial-de vel Nameki M, Moriguchi Y (2014) Recent developments in efforts to opmen t-repor t-2018 reduce GHG emissions in the iron and steel sector and their poten- Van Sluisveld M, De Boer HS, Hof A, Van Vuuren D, Schneider C, tial reductions in major producer countries. In: Proceedings of the Lechtenboehmer S (2019) Comparing quantitative industry decar- annual conference of the Japan Institute of Energy, vol 23(0), pp bonization perspectives towards 2050 for Europe. IAMC 12th 254–255. Doi: https://doi.or g/10.20550/jie taik aiyoushi .23.0_254 Annual Meeting, Tsukuba, Japan. https ://www.iamco nsort ium. NEDO (New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organi-org/wp-conte nt/uploa ds/2020/03/van_Sluis veld_NEW.pdf zation) (2018) Open innovation white paper. https ://www.nedo. Vogl V, Åhman M, Nilsson LJ (2018) Assessment of hydrogen direct go.jp/libra ry/open_innov ation _hakus yo.html reduction for fossil-free steelmaking. J Clean Prod 203:736–745. NEDO (2019) Annual report of the development of environmentally https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclep ro.2018.08.279 friendly process technology in Japan. https ://www .nedo.go.jp/ Wakabayashi M, Arimura TH (2016) Voluntary agreements to encour- conte nt/10090 5230.pdf age proactive fi rm action against climate change: an empirical Nikkei (2020) ArcelorMittal: steelmaking without coal, 5 trillion yen study of industry associations’ voluntary action plans in Japan. investment on natural gas and hydrogen. 2020.09.30. https: //www. J Clean Prod 112:2885–2895. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.jclep nikke i.com/artic le/DGKKZ O6437 1720Z 20C20 A9TJ2 000/ ro.2015.10.071 Oda J, Akimoto K, Sano F, Tomoda T (2007) Diffusion of energy World Steel Association (2019) World Steel in Figures 2019. https :// efficient technologies and CO emission reductions in iron and www .w or ld s teel .or g/en/dam/jcr :96d7a 585-e6b2-4d63-b943-4cd9a steel sector. Energy Econ 29:868–888. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.b621a 91/World %2520S teel%2520i n%2520F igure s%25202 019. eneco .2007.01.003 pdf. Oda J, Akimoto K (2019) Analysis of energy intensity of basic materi- Yamaji K, Matsuhashi M, Nagata Y, Kaya Y (1991) An integrated als industry in Japan. In: local energy, global markets, 42nd IAEE system for CO / energy/GNP analysis: case studies on economic international conference, May 29-June 1, 2019. International measures for C O reduction in Japan. Workshop on CO Reduc- 2 2 Association for Energy Economics. tion and Removal: Measures for the Next Century. 19–21 March Oshiro K, Gi K, Fujimori S et al (2019) Mid-century emission path- 1991. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Lax- ways in Japan associated with the global 2°C goal: national enburg, Austria. and global models’ assessments based on carbon budgets. Clim Change. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1058 4-019-02490 -x Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to Peters GP, Andrew RM, Canadell JG, Fuss S, Jackson RB, Korsbakken jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. JI et al (2017) Key indicators to track current progress and future ambition of the Paris Agreement. Nat Clim Change. https ://doi. org/10.1038/NCLIM ATE32 02 1 3 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Sustainability Science Springer Journals

Industrial decarbonization under Japan’s national mitigation scenarios: a multi-model analysis

Download PDF
17 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/industrial-decarbonization-under-japan-s-national-mitigation-scenarios-wDVh7Rcw6K

References (125)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2021
ISSN
1862-4065
eISSN
1862-4057
DOI
10.1007/s11625-021-00905-2
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Energy-intensive industries are difficult to decarbonize. They present a major challenge to the emerging countries that are currently in the midst of rapid industrialization and urbanization. This is also applicable to Japan, a developed economy, which retains a large presence in heavy industries compared to other developed economies. In this paper, the results obtained from four energy-economic and integrated assessment models were utilized to explore climate mitigation scenarios of Japan’s industries by 2050. The results reveal that: (i) Japan’s share of emissions from industries may increase by 2050, highlighting the difficulties in achieving industrial decarbonization under the prevailing industrial policies; (ii) the emission reduction in steelmaking will play a key role, which can be achieved by the implementation of carbon capture and expansion of hydrogen technologies after 2040; (iii) even under mitigation scenarios, electrification and the use of biomass use in Japan’s industries will continue to be limited in 2050, suggesting a low possibility of large-scale fuel switching or end-use decarbonization. After stocktaking of the current industry-sector modeling in integrated assessment models, we found that such limited uptake of cleaner fuels in the results may be related to the limited interests of both participating models and industry stakeholders in Japan, specifically the interests on the technologies that are still at the early stage of development but with high reduction potential. It is crucial to upgrade research and development activities to enable future industry-sector mitigation as well as to improve modeling capabilities of energy end-use technologies in integrated assessment models. Keywords Industry · Model intercomparison project · Nationally determined contribution · Japan Introduction th The 25 Conference of the Parties (COP25) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change reiter- ated the need for urgent action on climate change, stating the need for more efforts to achieve climate goals in order Handled by Shinichiro Fujimori, Kyoto University, Japan. to stabilize the global temperature rise at 1.5 °C by the end of the century (IPCC 2018). On the other hand, the bottom- * Yiyi Ju up approach of the Paris Agreement implied that policies juyiyi@ifi.u-tokyo.ac.jp should be developed based on the careful assessment of the Institute for Future Initiatives, University of Tokyo, unique situation of each country. For Japan, which prides Tokyo 113-0033, Japan itself on monozukuri (manufacturing) and retains a high Institute of Applied Energy, Tokyo, Japan share in heavy industries (METI 2020), this means that Institute of Energy Economics, Tokyo, Japan policies must address long-term decarbonization of the ind- sutry sector. The importance of industrial decarbonization Department of Environmental Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan has been mentioned in our previous paper (Sugiyama et al. 2019). Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Kanagawa, Japan Energy-intensive industries, such as steel and cement sectors, are extremely difficult to decarbonize in the short National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan Vol.:(0123456789) 1 3 412 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 run due to the increasing demand for industrial products Keidanren (Japan Business Federation) formulated its and subsidies from national strategies (Åhman et al. 2017), first voluntary action plan in 1998 termed Voluntary Action the time taken to update energy infrastructure (Davis et al. Plan for the Environment. The aim of this plan was to focus 2018), and the existence of process emissions (besides those on climate change mitigation after the Kyoto Protocol agree- from fuel combustion) and the need for high-temperatures. ment in 1997. The plan covered 38 industries, including This is particularly true for emerging countries that are in energy-intensive sectors, such as steel, cement, and machin- the midst of rapid industrialization and urbanization, such ery. After the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, as China, India, and Brazil (Fig. 1). it was renamed The Action Plan for the Low Carbon Society. Although Japan is a member of the Group of Seven (G7), Since 2008, evaluation of emission reduction has been con- the share of its industries in comparison with its total final ducted annually by a government committee and a third- energy consumption is much higher than the G7 average. In party committee. In the 2014 evaluation report (JBF 2014), fact, it is closer to the average of the Group of Twenty (G20), it was reported that JBF members contributed over 80% to which includes emerging economies. the total domestic industrial emissions and achieved a 5.6% The Government of Japan has taken numerous steps reduction in emissions, as compared to the 2005 level. to promote mitigation in the industry sector. The Plan for The Act on the Rational Use of Energy, also known as Global Warming Countermeasure (GoJ 2016) and the the Energy Conservation Law, was enacted in Japan in 1979 Intended Nationally Determined Contribution submitted to and was upgraded several times in order to respond to social United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change needs. It directly covered entities from the industry and (GoJ 2015) acknowledged the contribution of industries to transport sector and promoted an efficient energy manage- emission reduction since 2013 and has called for contin- ment system. The obligation of entities included a periodic ued efforts. The underlying principle is that climate change report on energy consumption, implementation of specified mitigation should not harm economic growth, but it should measures in the guidelines (adjustment of operating hours), simultaneously contribute to the achievement of other pol- and implementation of energy conservation measures (METI icy goals, such as economy, productivity, and added value 2013). growth (Long-Term Low-Carbon Vision, MOE 2016a; also Another major feature of the Act was to set energy effi- Long-Term Growth Strategy based on the Paris Agreement: ciency standards for various types of products, including Cabinet Decision, MOE 2019a). This approach has mostly appliances and vehicles. Accordingly, the Top Runner Pro- relied on voluntary action, especially of the Japan Business gram was executed, wherein standards were set according to Federation (JBF; Keidanren), and actions driven by Energy the level of the best performing products (top-runners) in the Conservation Law to improve energy efficiency. past years (METI 2015a). 31 products, including passenger Fig. 1 Sectoral shares of final energy consumption in differ - ent countries/regions. Source: summarized from IEA (2016), sorted according to the share of the industry sector 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 413 vehicles and air-conditioners have been covered under this of industries compared to the transport sector (Sugiyama program as of 2020. et  al. 2014). Among the 21 models that contributed to Of the various mitigation approaches, energy efficiency the IPCC’s report titled Global warming of 1.5 °C (IPCC has been the main priority, which has made Japan one of the 2018), an endogenous and explicit representation of the most energy efficient economies. The converse is that since electrification of transport demand (e.g., electric vehicles, there is a decreasing return to energy efficiency investments, electric rail) is observed in 17 models, while only 9 of Japan now has a limited, domestic energy conservation the 21 models focus on the electrification of industrial potential (IEA 2016; Kuramochi 2016). It, therefore, pushed energy demand (e.g., electric arc furnace, heat pumps, for international mechanisms, such as the Joint Crediting electric boilers, conveyor belts, extensive use of motor Mechanism (and the Clean Development Mechanism). In control, induction heating, and industrial use of microwave this, if a partner country installs an efficient, Japanese tech- heating). nology, emission reduction against the baseline is counted Meanwhile, previous analysis from a multi-model study as a credit. Furthermore, the Ministry of Environment also targeting Japan shows that the large-scale deployment of stated Japan’s financial and technical contributions to devel- low-carbon energy (such as nuclear, renewable, and carbon oping countries at the COP20 (MOE 2014). Moreover, Japan capture and storage) in the energy supply side is shared is promoting inter-industry and international cooperation across most of the 9 participating models in scenarios con- (MOE 2016b; MOE 2019b; METI 2019a). sistent with 1.5 or 2 degrees of global warming (Oshiro et al. Besides energy efficiency, other mitigation measures have 2019). Improving the value-added of industrial products is been explored for industries. Such measures include Carbon also suggested in a study proposing a roadmap towards a Capture and Storage (CCS), Carbon Capture, Utilization, low-carbon society in Japan (Ashina et al. 2012). In addition and Storage (CCUS; MOE 2008), introduction of renewables to such technology deployment in the energy supply side and into industrial production processes (JISF 2014), and the expectation of industrial structure changes, previous studies application and development of low-carbon products and also paid special attention to the diffusion of energy-efficient infrastructure (JBF 2019). For CCS, few demonstration pro- technologies in industries (Akashi 2012; Oda et al. 2007). jects have been conducted. Recently, the Tomakomai project However, such review summaries are scarce. To fill in such was completed with an injection of 300,000 t-CO (METI a gap, as the first multi-model analysis of industries in Japan, 2019b; IEA 2017a). For the introduction of hydrogen, the this paper further investigates the industry-related emissions COURSE50 project has been developed and is expected under different sets of climate policy, energy demand, and to reduce 30% of C O emissions in steelmaking industries technology scenarios, which contributes to a better under- (JISF 2014). standing of industrial decarbonization in Japan. Some price instruments are applicable to the industry sec- Given the different emphasis on mitigation measures tor too, though they tax by fossil fuel type and the stringency by different policies, namely energy saving, CCS, lower is weak (exemptions and refunds in certain raw material demand, and energy end-use technology changes, the aim industries, MOE 2014). Emission trading schemes (Tokyo of this paper was to answer the following research questions: market and Saitama market) started to work in force after 2010. It mainly targeted buildings and but also covered 580 How high would industrial energy consumption and emis- factories as liable entities (ICAP 2020a,2020b). However, sions go by 2050? How does it compare to other sectors, these were limited to only 2 out of the 47 prefectures of other historical periods of Japan, or reports from other Japan. model teams? Recent studies have identified new opportunities for What are the most important mitigation measures for the industrial mitigation. The proposed approaches include industry sector and its sub-sectors? improving material efficiency (Hertwich et al. 2019; UNIDO Can industrial decarbonization solely count on energy 2018; Grubler et al. 2018), negative emissions technologies saving? Does the industry sector in Japan need CCS? (IEA 2019; ICEF 2016), bridging technology gaps (UNIDO How well does low demand work? Will there be an 2016; Bataille et al. 2018), and increasing the uptake of increase in the uptake of clean energy carriers (elec- renewables in industries (IEA 2017b; McMillan et al. 2016). tricity, biomass, and hydrogen) in industries in the There is also interest in digitalization, such as artificial future? intelligence and internet of things. In Japan, the concept of Society 5.0 is used to describe a new, human-centric digital In addition, we ask the following modeling question: society (METI 2017; MOE 2016b). However, unlike the emphasis of policies and actions What is the status of industry-sector modeling in Japa- on the industry sector, in the model community, it seems nese energy-economic and integrated assessment models? that models are slow to include a detailed representation What should be expanded? 1 3 414 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 In this paper, the data from four energy-economic and 2016; Kuramochi et al. 2012). This scenario intends to integrated assessment models, AIM/Hub-Japan, AIM/ look at the impact of unavailability of this technology. Enduse-Japan, IEEJ_Japan 2017, and TIMES-Japan, were 26by30 + 80by50_LoDem: same as the NDC&MCS utilized to analyze the future scenarios of Japan’s industry scenario but with lower growth in GDP per-capita, by 2050, followed by a decomposition of emission changes based on SSP2. Research institutes in Japan generally based on the Kaya identity to investigate how Japan’s indus- assume lower expectations in GDP per-capita growth trial decarbonization would be driven. Based on our previous (Kuriyama et al. 2019), compared to the 1.7% per year work (Suguyama et al. 2019), this paper stock-takes of the growth from 2015 to 2030 that is assumed by Japan’s current industry-sector modeling also helps to clarify the NDC and MCS (METI 2015b). modeling status that is underway as well as the potential 26by30 + 80by50_LoDemInd: This scenario assumes improvements in the modeling of end-use technologies in that the energy service demand in the industry sector industries. will be further reduced by 50% by 2050. As the industry sector is identified as an important sector (Sugiyama et  al. 2019), reducing its service demand (Fujimori et al. 2014) may decrease the policy costs. The “50%” Methodology value underlines a range of possibilities that may lower the energy service demands in the future. Such a drop Participating models may happen intentionally due to improvements in mate- rial efficiency or final consumption preferences shifting The multi-model analysis is based on the Stanford Energy towards smart devices and low-carbon products. It can Modeling Forum (EMF) 35 Japan Model Intercomparison also occur unintentionally because of natural disasters, Project (JMIP). The participating models include AIM/Hub- global financial crises, pandemics, and similar extreme Japan, AIM/Enduse-Japan, IEEJ_Japan 2017, and TIMES- events (McCollum et al. 2020). In fact, in May 2020, Japan, wherein AIM/Hub-Japan is a general equilibrium the largest steelmaker in Japan, that is Nippon Steel, cut (GE) model and the rest are partial equilibrium (PE) models. down 30% of its capacity partly due to the COVID-19, The GE model AIM/Hub-Japan has price-elastic service which is almost the same level of capacity cuts during demands, while other partial equilibrium models follow the steel recession after 1985 Plaza agreement (Nikkei exogenous service demands. Considering such differences, 2020). the GE model is separated from the group of PE models in part of the following results. Other differences among mod- Population growth in all models follows the same els, such as the industrial energy coverage and its data, as assumption (the middle population projection by the well as the industrial emissions coverage and its data source, National Institute of Population and Social Security are listed in Table ESM i. Research, IPSS, 2017) under all scenarios. These four scenarios are selected from the whole set of scenarios in the EMF35 JMIP study as they cover almost Scenario design the entire range of results, at least with respect to the total final energy consumption of the industry sector and its The scenario design of EMF35 JMIP considers four dimen-energy-related CO emissions (see Fig. ESM i). sions: policy, technology, demand, and imports. A descrip- By looking at the variables under all the selected sce- tion of all these scenarios are listed in Sugiyama et al. (2021, narios (e.g., CO emissions from energy consumption this issue). This paper focuses on the following scenarios: of industries, final energy consumption of electricity by industries), the contribution of several important mitiga- Base_Def: the baseline scenario, left to the individual tion measures in the industry sector can be revealed. For modeling group’s choice, with no additional climate poli- example, the impacts of CCS can be shown by comparing cies and no other sub-regional emission reduction targets. results under 26by30 + 80by50_Def and 26by30 + 80by50_ 26by30 + 80by50_Def: the NDC&MCS scenario, where NoCCS. The impacts of lower demands can be shown the models apply Japan’s Nationally Determined Con- by comparing results under 26by30 + 80by50_Def and tribution (NDC, 26% emissions reduction by FY2030 26by30 + 80by50_LoDem/LoDemInd. Moreover, a fur- relative to the FY2013 levels) and Mid-Century Strategy ther Kaya decomposition can show the contribution of the (MCS, 80% emissions reduction by 2050). improvements in energy efficiency (by energy intensity 26by30 + 80by50_NoCCS: same as the NDC&MCS sce- factor), the energy end-use technology changes and indus- nario but without CCS deployment. CCS is considered as trial electrification (by energy intensity factor). a key mitigation technology in the industry sector (ICEF 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 415 factors, assuming that the contribution of each factor to the Decomposition of emission changes based on the Kaya identity interaction sum is equal. The change in CO emissions can be then decomposed into the sum of the contribution of four In this paper, decomposition of emission changes is con- factors, namely the contribution of population factor, C , the per-capita production factor, C , the energy intensity factor, ducted based on the Kaya identity (Ehrlich and Holdren 1971; Kaya 1990; Yamaji et al. 1991). The C O emissions C , and the emission intensity factor,C . e i in each sub-sector are decomposed into four factors, namely ΔEMS = C + C + C + C p d e i (4) population, per-capita production (production of the final product in that sub-sector), energy intensity, and emission By using the factor of energy intensity e as an example, intensity (Eq. 1): its contribution C can be formulated as PRD ENE EMS EMS = POP ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ = p ⋅ d ⋅ e ⋅ i, (1) C = p d Δei + Δpd Δei + p ΔdΔei + p d ΔeΔi POP PRD ENE e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 where EMS represents the C O emissions in each sub-sec- + ΔpΔdΔei + p ΔdΔeΔi +Δpd ΔeΔi 0 0 0 tor, POP represents the national population, PRD represents the production in each sub-sector, and ENE represents the + ΔpΔdΔeΔi final energy consumption in each sub-sector. Correspond- (5) ingly, p represents population, d represents per-capita pro- The unit and main final products of four selected sub- duction, e represents energy intensity of production, and i sectors are shown in Table 1. represents emission intensity. Considering their either high emission level/intensity Decomposition with n factors has n! unique decomposi- or difficulty of further emission abatement, the sub-sector tions; moreover, there are numerous ways to deal with non- cement, steel, pulp and paper, and chemicals reported by uniqueness. The refined Laspeyers decomposition (Ang participating model teams are included in this paper. 2000; Peters et  al, 2017) was utilized to ensure that the decomposition results had no residuals and that it satisfied the characteristics of time reversal, factor reversal, and zero- Sub‑sectoral technologies value robustness. The change in C O emissions between year t and year 0 can be decomposed to The main low-carbon technologies modeled in the selected industry sub-sectors in the participating models are listed EMS − EMS ΔEMS t 0 = in Table 2. EMS EMS 0 0 p +Δp d +Δd e +Δe i +Δi − p ⋅ d ⋅ e ⋅ i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EMS Results (2) and extended as Final energy of the industry sector in Japan ΔEMS =Δpd e i + p Δde i + p d Δei 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Figure 2 shows the key variable, final energy of the indus- + p d e Δi + …+ΔpΔde i +… (3) 0 0 0 0 0 try sector under two main scenarios, baseline (Base- +ΔpΔdΔei + …+ΔpΔdΔeΔi, line_Def) and NDC&MCS scenario (26% emissions reduction by 2030 and 80% emissions reduction by 2050, where the first four items have only one factor of change; 26by30 + 80by50_Def). the remaining items demonstrate the interaction of these Table 1 Representation of sub- Variable Unit Sectoral boundary sectors of the industry sector in Japan Production|Cement Mt/yr Manufacture of cement, lime, and plaster Production|Chemicals Original unit in Manufacture of basic chemicals, chemical products each model Production|Pulp and Paper Mt/yr Manufacture of paper and paper products, publish- ing, printing, and reproduction of recorded media Production|Steel Mt/yr Manufacture and casting of basic iron and steel The non-ferrous metals sector has a wide range of final products which are not reported in a same unit of energy service demand by all model teams, it is removed from sub-sector-level result figures 1 3 416 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 Table 2 H , Biomass, CCS, and other low-carbon industry technologies included in participating models Steel Cement Chemicals Pulp and Paper AIM/Hub-Japan EAF, CCS CCS Biomass for energy CCS AIM/Enduse-Japan EAF, CCS Biomass for energy CCS IEEJ_Japan 2017 EAF, CCS H Biomass for energy Hydrogen reduction, CCS TIMES-Japan EAF, CCS H meeting generic high-temperature heat Biomass for energy Hydrogen reduction, demands mixed with natural gas, CCS High temperature heat pump Electric Arc Furnace (EAF); H in IEEJ_Japan 2017 is based on imports; H2 in TIME-Japan can come from both domestic production and imports Fig. 2 Final energy of the industry sector in Japan since Models show different industry shares even for the base the variation of these PE models in base years, in the treat- year. This variation is partially explained by the difference in ment of external drivers, the coverage of industrial energy, the industrial energy coverage, emission coverage, and their and thus vary in the mitigation measures preferences in the databases used. Models use both the energy balance of the 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenario results. However, all PE International Energy Agency the comprehensive energy sta- models show a similar small gap between the Baseline_Def tistics compiled by METI. In fact, these databases disagree and 26by30 + 80by50_Def. Extra cut down of energy con- on the industry share of final energy (see Table ESM i in this sumption to achieve the NDC&MCS goal can be expected paper, and Sugiyama et al. (2021) for more on this point). as limited. Figure  2 shows the final energy of the industry sector The share of industry in Japan’s national final energy is from 2010 to 2050. Under the 80% reduction constraint, shown in Fig. 3. According to all PE models, around half of the long-term energy consumption varies among models, the total final energy consumption will be contributed by the even among all PE models. A 47.8% decline in 2050 can be industry sector if NDC&MCS goal is achieved, which is a observed in IEEJ_Japan 2017 compared to the 2010 level, high number given the context that G7 average in 2016 was similarly a 32.2% decline in AIM/Enduse-Japan, and a 6.9% 19.7% and OECD 21.7% (IEA, 2016). Moreover, the share decline in TIMES-Japan. Such variation can be caused by of the industry sector increases by 2050 in all PE models. In 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 417 Fig. 3 Long term changes of sectoral final energy in Japan under NDC&MDS scenario the GE model, this share decreases as the total final energy not perfectly comparable with EMF 35 JMIP scenarios, the consumption does not reduce as much as other PE models. results are still good references, as these models consider the To place Japan’s industry in a broader context, Fig.  4 position of Japan in the global economy, where less atten- presents the data from global models in the ADVANCE tion is paid in EMF 35 JMIP participating models. Based on project (Advanced Model Development and Validation for the global emission restrictions, global models give a lower the Improved Analysis of Costs and Impacts of Mitigation estimation of the final energy industry share. They reported Policies) in addition to the EMF 35 JMIP results. The gray the emission reduction rate in Japan’s industry sector in 2050 lines show the results of the industry’s share in final energy with a range of 35.6% (GCAM4.2_ADVANCEWP6) to from global model teams. Although the ADVANCE Syn- 58.3% (IMAGE 3.0, see Fig. ESM iii) compared to the 2010 thesis Scenario Database (version 1.0) was conducted ear- level, also less than the expectation of model teams from lier during 2013–2016, also the scenario 2030_Med2C is Japan (50.0% to 69.4% reduction). Given such conditions, Fig. 4 Ranges of industry’s share in final energy under selected source from ADVANCE Synthesis Scenario Database (version 1.0), scenarios: results from Japan and global models. Source: Regard- scenario 2030_Med2C (limit cumulative 2011–2100 CO2 emissions ing the results from EMF35 JMIP model teams, ribbons show the to 1600 GtCO2; more likely than not to stay below 2 °C; implement- ranges under main scenarios (Baseline_Def, 26by30 + 80by50_ ing without strengthening until 2030), project conducted during Def, 26by30 + 80by50_NoCCS) and lines show the value under 2013–2016. Industry’s share in final energy under more scenarios see 26by30 + 80by50_Def. Regarding the results from global models, Fig. ESM iii 1 3 418 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 the results from 3 of all 4 JMIP models show that the indus- implementation of CCS in industry largely varies among try’s share in Japan will stay still after 2020 and reach models. The 80% emission reduction by 2050 will be con- around 40 percent by 2050 and, still higher than the estima- tributed significantly by CCS, especially the CCS of fossil tion of the OECD average from IPCC AR5 (Sugiyama et al. fuels according to the results from AIM/Hub-Japan and 2019). Compared to these reference models from institutions AIM/Enduse-Japan. On the other hand, more implementa- other than Japan, JMIP PE models show higher results in the tion of CCS does not seem very necessary to achieve the final energy industry share (among which the highest 59.5% NDC-MCS goal according to the results from IEEJ_Japan under 26by30 + 80by50_Def, from TIMES-Japan), closer to 2017 and TIMES-Japan, among which a certain share of the world average rather than OECD countries. emissions generated from industry-related activities would be captured in TIMES-Japan. CO emissions generated from the industry sector Regarding which sector would cut down more emis- in Japan sions, in half of the participating models (AIM/Enduse- Japan and TIMES-Japan), the transportation sector shows The corresponding CO emissions of the industry sector a larger potential in the emission reduction with lower under the baseline and the 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenarios marginal costs, and its absolute number of reduction are shown in Fig. 5. The variable shows the sum emissions exceeds the industry sector. In the other half of the mod- generated from the energy use in the industry sector and els (AIM/Hub-Japan and IEEJ_Japan 2017), a larger bur- from industrial processes. den of emission mitigation will go to the industry sector, Compared to the final energy of the industry sector in shown as a reduction in industry’s annual emissions over- Fig. 2, the variations in CO emissions among models are weighs others. No matter to which sector such priority of smaller. Under the 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenario, an 83.4% emission reduction burden would go, the results of JMIP emission reduction in the industry sector in 2050 can be suggest that annual CO emission in the industry sector observed in AIM/Hub-Japan compared to the 2010 level, should at least cut around 150 Mt in 2050 compared to similarly a 69.4% decline in AIM/Enduse-Japan, a 60.8% the 2010 level. How such a cut will be achieved, namely decline in IEEJ_Japan 2017, and a 50.0% decline in TIMES- to what extent fuel switching in industries works, which Japan. To reach an 80% emission reduction goal in total for sub-sectors should decarbonize more, or other mitigation all sectors, model teams have different expectations of the measures that have not been decently modeled in this pro- emissions reduction efforts of industries. ject, would be investigated in the next sections. Among all Similar to the structure of sectoral final energy, the participating models, the GE model shows the largest net industry sector occupies the largest share of demand- emission reduction in the industry sectors. side total emissions in all PE models (See Fig.  6). The Fig. 5 CO emissions of the industry sector in Japan since 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 419 Fig. 6 Long term changes of sectoral CO emissions in Japan and the contribution of carbon sequestration under NDC&MCS scenario According to PE models, the industry sector may still Decomposition by source rely on the energy consumption of solids in 2050, which is a relatively larger share compared to other sectors. The decomposition of the industry’s final energy by source Among such decomposition of consumption, only around is shown in Fig. 7, compared with the same decomposition 10% will be biomass, and the rest still coal. Moreover, in other sectors. all PE models report very similar results of the industrial Fig. 7 Industry’s contribution to the reduction in annual demand-side emissions under NDC&MCS scenario 1 3 420 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 electrification level. Under the NDC&MCS scenario, the position of steelmaking decarbonization to the achievement share of electricity consumption in the industry sector of Japan’s NDC&MDS goal. will remain at a relatively low level and slightly increase The sub-sectoral CO emissions under more scenarios during 2010–2050. Factors determining such an electri- also see Fig. ESM ii. The selected scenarios can examine the fication rate are numerous and would need to be analyzed impacts of two mitigation measures in the industry sector, separately in each sector (Sakamoto et  al. 2021). The CCS and lower energy service demands. Both final energy modeling of electricity technologies in industries (e.g., and CO emissions are reported as the lowest value under electric arc furnaces in steelmaking, or more generally LoDemInd scenarios among all scenarios in nearly all sub- the use of electricity to meet industrial heat demands), as sectors and models. In the steel sub-sector, around 50–60 well as the price and changes in prices of such electric- Mt emissions will be reduced (compared to the baseline ity technologies, may affect the result of electrification scenario) by halving steelmaking’s energy service demand. rate. Furthermore, the large-scale introduction of elec- The other mitigation measure, CCS, is modeled in the tricity-based facilities may sharply increase the industrial steel and cement sub-sectors in all participating models. In electricity consumption and exert more pressure on the AIM/Enduse-Japan, the emission of steelmaking would be electricity supply. However, the manner in which energy much higher under the 26by30 + 80by50_NoCCS scenario service demands react to such changes with respect to than under the 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenario, especially the availability of energy supply cannot be solved simul- after 2030. Such a difference indicates the importance of taneously in PE models with exogenous energy service CCS to the decarbonization of steelmaking in AIM/Enduse- demands. On the other hand, the switch from fossil fuels Japan. In TIMES-Japan and IEEJ_Japan 2017, the emis- to hydrogen in industries is less costly in terms of system sion of steelmaking under the 26by30 + 80by50_NoCCS mortification, such as fewer changes in sensors, controls, scenario would be lower or nearly the same under the and labor skills (ICEF, 2019). However, its introduction 26by30 + 80by50_Def scenario, indicating the limited con- in the industry sector will be limited according to Fig. 7. tribution of CCS in steelmaking decarbonization in these Overall, according to the results from PE models, the rise two models. The emission reduction would be achieved by in the electrification rate and the introduction of biomass the introduction of hydrogen technologies in steelmaking use in industries by 2050 will still be limited, suggesting in TIMES-Japan (after 2040, shown in Fig. 7). While in the a low possibility of large-scale fuel switching or end-use cement sub-sector, a larger impact of CCS can be observed technology substitution in production processes in Japan. in TIMES-Japan. How industries can benefit from an increasingly low-carbon Considering the key role of steelmaking, a decomposition energy supply remains a pressing issue. considering more scenarios is conducted in this sub-sector, shown in Fig.  10. The decomposition reveals how much Decomposition by sub‑sector each factor, namely changes in final demands for industrial products, energy efficiency improvement, and emission Cement, chemicals, pulp and paper, steel, the final energy intensity reduction, would contribute to the changes of sub- and CO emissions of the four selected industry sub-sectors sectoral emission (results of all sub-sectors see Fig. ESM v). are shown in Fig. 8. According to the results, the contribution of emission inten- The gap of sub-sectoral final energy between NDC&MCS sity (green bar) will overweigh the contribution of energy and baseline scenarios is small in all sub-sectors except efficiency (blue bar) after 2030, especially in the steel and steel, so is the gap of sub-sectoral CO emissions. The cement sub-sector. potentials of both emission reduction and energy conser- From the temporal perspective, two of the three models vation of these sub-sectors would be limited. On the other report that significant emission reductions in the steel sector hand, sub-sectoral final energy and CO emissions do not may occur from 2040 to 2050, instead of a continuous reduc- share a similar structure. In the cement sub-sector, the high tion after 2020. From the perspective of factors, the impact emission intensity and the large number of emissions would of emission intensity factor would concentrate in the period be generated from production processes, shown as a small 2040–2050, while the energy efficiency factor would keep share in final energy and a larger share in CO emissions. functioning from 2020, which is along with the decomposi- As mentioned in Fig. 9, annual C O emission in the industry tion result of all sub-sectors. sector should at least cut around 150 Mt in 2050, among Regarding the contribution of energy efficiency improve- which around 100 Mt cut would be the mission of the steel ment, its effect on emission reduction is significant during sub-sector. A large share in final energy and a larger share 2020–2040 in IEEJ_Japan 2017, while it is smaller, but still in CO emissions, together with such a large gap between exists, in TIMES-Japan during the whole period. In AIM/ emission levels in 2050 and 2010, again emphasized the key Enduse-Japan, the contribution of would be lower in the period 2040–2050 due to the introduction of more CCS. 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 421 Fig. 8 Sectoral final energy by source under NDC&MCS scenario. Notes: the decomposition by source under more scenarios in 2050 see Fig. ESM iv Models hold different views but all agree that even if there 2019).The long-term expectation of the production of steel is no CCS implemented, the steelmaking decarbonization also considers global assumptions (Nameki and Moriguchi cannot count on energy saving after 2040. Regarding the 2014) that may affect total domestic production, as well as contribution of emission intensity reduction, it is reported the potential of recyclable scraps (Kawase and Matsuoka in IEEJ_Japan 2017 that certain contributions would exist 2015) that may affect the introduction of EAF capacity. The throughout the whole period, in TIMES-Japan mainly after estimation of AIM/Enduse-Japan and TIMES-Japan shows 2030, and in AIM/Enduse-Japan huge contributions only that steel production may slightly but steadily increase, concentrated in the period 2040–2050. As mentioned, this while this growth may cease in 2020, drop steadily after- is a reflection of the CCS implementation in AIM/Enduse- ward, and lead to the reduction in emissions in IEEJ_Japan Japan and the more introduction of hydrogen technologies 2017. All models report the largest emission mitigation after 2040 in TIMES-Japan. led by a reduction in production under the low industry Regarding the contribution of final product demand demand scenario in nearly all periods. Such reduction changes from 2010 to 2016, the decrease in production vol- would ease the pressure of energy conservation, although ume has not been as significant as other industrial materials TIMES-Japan reports that such a decrease in steel demand such as non-ferrous metals and cement (Oda and Akimoto and the decarbonization by such lower demand would not 1 3 422 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 Fig. 9 Sub-sectoral industry’s final energy (a) and CO emissions emissions in b only track emissions from energy sources and do not (b) by sub-sector under NDC&MCS scenario. Notes: the decompo- include emissions generated from industrial processes (except the sition by subsector under more scenarios in 2050 see Fig. ESM vi; steel sub-sector in TIMES-Japan) Fig. 10 Decomposition of emission changes based on the Kaya identity: the steel sub-sector. Notes: the decomposition results of all sub-sectors see ESM v continue after 2040. Moreover, the marginal abatement Discussion cost of C O emissions would be the lowest under the low industry demand scenario, followed by the building sector Robust assessment of long-term decarbonization of the and the transportation sector (the results of carbon price industry sector relies on consideration of prospect low see Fig. ESM vii). carbon technologies. This multi-model analysis revealed 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 423 key limitations and aspects to improve such assessment in the current status and future deployment of CCS capac- in terms of the coverage of decarbonization technolo- ity, it is essential to stimulate early investments in steel and gies. CCS is applicable in all the participating models, cement sub-sectors. Such investment can be supported by whereas the hydrogen technologies in steelmaking are only targeted policy instruments such as tax credits or market- included in some models. The use of biomass as fuel or based schemes. Before these steps are taken, there should be feedstock in the chemical sub-sector is not included in all public awareness of carbon capture’s necessity and the estab- the participating models. These limitations are barriers to lishment of a grand design that focuses on the type of CCUS the representation of fuel switching in the industry sector. technologies that should be introduced in specific sectors (as Moreover, the performance of mitigation measures other discussed in an early stage in the Study Group for Innovative than energy conservation in the future industries cannot Environmental Innovation Strategy, METI 2019c), both of be revealed if the currently unmatured technologies have which require efforts from the modeling communities. not been modeled in the first place. Widening the range Figure 4 compares the Japanese and global IAM results of end-use technologies and devices may greatly improve with the industry’s share in the final energy consumption. the modeling of IAMs. Table 3 shows the steelmaking and Although an analysis of the reasons that lead to such dif- cement technologies worldwide, in the EU, in Japan, and ferences between the Japanese and global IAM results was in all participating models. conducted in this paper, such differences re-emphasize the Although the technology development in industries has necessity of model intercomparison projects (van Sluisveld been included in some reports in Japan (NEDO 2018; METI et al. 2019). Policymakers will have a more holistic view of 2019c), the range of the categories of current technologies/ the models have better access to parameters of local activi- practices in Japan is smaller than that of the EU, and even ties and a better understanding of global networks. Regard- smaller when represented in JMIP IAMs. According to the ing the sensitivity of scenario parameters, the ranges of the mitigation scenarios for the steel industry conducted by the key variables (i.e., industrial final energy) under demand Japan Iron and Steel Federation, hydrogen-reduction, CCS, scenarios and policy scenarios are shown in Fig. ESM vii. and CCU are included in the most optimistic scenario by the steel industry (JISF 2019). However, technologies with low technology readiness levels but high reduction potential, Conclusion such as aqueous (e.g., developed during the project SID- ERWIN) and molten oxide electrolysis (e.g., developed by In this paper, the data from four energy economic and inte- Boston Metals) in steelmaking, electrification of the cal - grated assessment models were utilized to explore climate ciner (e.g., developed during the project LEILAC), and mitigation scenarios of Japan’s industry by 2050, including magnesium or ultramafic cement in cement-making has not its final energy and CO emissions, their long term changes attracted large-scale interests of either participating models and structures, as well as the impacts of several industrial or industry stakeholders in Japan. The modeling of such sub- mitigation measures. This was followed by a decomposition sectors in a wider range of periods, such as by 2100, is also of emission changes based on the Kaya identity to investi- worth considering. gate what how Japan’s industrial decarbonization would be Also, the uptake of hydrogen, specifically the direct driven. The results show that: reduced iron technology has not been included in all model The industry sector dominates Japan’s total final energy teams. Recently, three main producer companies in Japan consumption. By 2050, its share will increase in all the par- and two in Europe have raised their total investment in coal- tial equilibrium models, further indicating the difficulty in free steelmaking technologies, reaching 264.7 billion yen achieving industrial decarbonization by improving energy in 2019, an 14% increase compared to the 2015 level (Nik- efficiencies. The general equilibrium model shows the larg- kei 2020). In our future works, another set of NoHydrogen est net emission reduction in the industry sector. These scenarios will help investigate the contribution of hydrogen results of JMIP suggest that, in order to achieve the Nation- introduction in energy demand sectors. ally Determined Contribution and Mid-Century Strategy th So far, over 3/4 of the C O capture capacity that has goal of Japan, a large cut in the annual C O emission in 2 2 been built in the past decade and that is currently opera- the industry sector would be inevitable. Compared to other tional worldwide is in low-cost processes (such as hydrogen sectors, the industry sector may still rely on solids in 2050, production-related processes, gas processing, etc.) instead as raw materials in production as well as fuels to meet the of industries, wherein the capture and use of C O would be industrial heat demand. Under the mitigation scenarios, the economically and technically challenging (IEA 2019). In rise in the electrification rate and the introduction of biomass Japan’s industries, CCS has been regarded as a technocratic use in industries will still be limited (electrification rate up to approach that fully relies on consensus among political elites around 30% in all PE models), suggesting a low possibility and experts (Asayama and Ishii 2014). To bridge the gap 1 3 424 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 1 3 Table 3 Modeling of industry technologies in IAMs: in steel and in cement sub-sector Technologies worldwide GHG reduction potential TRL Technologies (under development Technologies (under development Technologies covered by JMIP (steel sub-sector) included) in EU included) in Japan participating models Current EAF (depends on Up to 99% All electricity intensity) BF-BOF w/ top gas recirculation & 60% High Advanced direct reduction with CCS; CCUS (recovery/recycling from All CCUS (Leeson et al. 2017; Axelson EC 2013) byproduct gases; JISF 2019) et al. 2018; Birat 2011) HIsarna with concentrated CCUS 80–90% Medium HIsarna (CCS; EECRsteel 2011) Ferro-coke process (NEDO 2019) (Axelson et al. 2018) Hydrogen direct reduced iron 99% Medium Hydrogen direct reduced iron Internal hydrogen (JISF 2019) IEEJ_Japan 2017, TIMES-Japan (Fischedick et al., 2014; Vogl et al., 2018) Aqueous and Molten Oxide electrolysis 99% Low Electrolysis process (EC 2013) (Axelson et al., 2018; Fischedick et al., 2014) Technologies worldwide GHG reduction potential TRL Technologies (under development Technologies (under development Technologies covered by JMIP (cement sub-sector) included) in EU included) in Japan participating models Clinker substitution (e.g., lime- 40–50% High Further reduction of clinker content Improve efficiency All stone + calcined clays) (ECRA 2017) (cooler, kiln, preheater, etc.; JCA 2013) Alternative lower GHG fuels (e.g., 40% High Alternative fuels, Fuel switching, Alternative fuels and waste heat recov- All waste biofuels and hydrogen) waste heat recovery ery (JCA 2013) (steam, ORC, Kalina Cycle; ECRA 2017) CCUS for process heating & Calcina- 99% calc., Medium Post-combustion capture Calcination-carbonation cycle All tion-carbonation cycle (Moore 2017; < = 90% heat Leeson et al. 2017) Electrification of the calciner (Hills 60% Medium et al. 2016, 2017) Magnesium or ultramafic cements Can be negative Low (Lehne and Preston 2018; Scrivener et al. 2018; Gartner and Sui, 2017) Notes: Technology readiness level (TRL). For the steel sub-sector, the current global average emission intensity is 1.83 tC O -eq/t (Worldsteel 2019); the details of more conventional mitigation measures (e.g., coke dry quechning, top pressure recovery turbine, etc.) are not included in this table. For the cement sub-sector, the current global average emission intensity is 0.55 tCO -eq/t (ECRA 2017); the details of more conventional mitigation measures (e.g., pre-heaters) are not included in this table. Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 425 the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not of large-scale fuel switching or end-use technology revolu- permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will tion in production processes in Japan. need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a Regarding the mitigation measure energy saving, the con- copy of this licence, visit http://creativ ecommons .or g/licenses/b y/4.0/. tribution of emission intensity reduction to the industrial decarbonization will overweigh the contribution of energy efficiency improvement after 2030, especially in the steel References sub-sector and cement sub-sector. Decarbonization in steel- making would be key to the achievement of Japan’s national Åhman M, Nilsson LJ, Johansson B (2017) Global climate policy and deep decarbonization of energy-intensive industries energy- emission reduction goal. Such a cut in steelmaking can be intensive industries, 3062. Doi: https ://doi.org/10.1080/14693 achieved by the implementation of CCS or more introduc- 062.2016.11670 09 tion of hydrogen technologies after 2040. Decarbonization Akashi O, Hijioka Y, Masui T, Hanaoka T, Kainuma M (2012) GHG in steelmaking cannot count on extra energy conservation emission scenarios in Asia and the world: the key technologies for signic fi ant reduction. Energy Econ 34(SUPPL. 3):S346–S358. after 2040. Low demand for energy services in the industry https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco .2012.04.011 sector may largely decrease the marginal abatement cost of Ang BW (2000) A survey of index decomposition analysis in energy CO emissions (Sugiyama et al. 2021). and environmental studies. Energy 25:1149–1176 Stocktaking of the current modeling practice helps us see Asayama S, Ishii A (2014) Media representations and governance of CCS: framings and policy implications of Japanese newspaper’s the limitation of how the current modeling investigates the coverage. Soc Tech Res Essay Collect 11:127–137. https ://doi. crucial concerns of industries in Japan. A wider range of org/10.3392/socio techn ica.11.127 end-use technologies and devices, including technologies Ashina S, Fujino J, Masui T, Ehara T, Hibino G (2012) A roadmap with low technology readiness levels, can be considered as towards a low-carbon society in Japan using backcasting meth- odology: Feasible pathways for achieving an 80% reduction in alternative options in energy-related integrated assessment CO emissions by 2050. Energy Policy 41:584–598. https://doi. models that are highly encouraged. The discussion in this org/10.1016/j.enpol .2011.11.020 paper also leads to more research questions, such as how Axelson M, Robson I, Khandekar G, Wyns T (2018) Breaking industries can benefit from increasingly low-carbon energy through: Industrial Low-CO Technologies on the Horizon. 92. www.ies.be/Break ing-Throu gh_Repor t_13072 018 supply, or to support such a transition in energy supply, Bataille C, Åhman M, Neuhoff K, Nilsson LJ, Fischedick M, Lech- how would the demand for industrial products and services tenböhmer S et al (2018) A review of technology and policy change. deep decarbonization pathway options for making energy- intensive industry production consistent with the Paris Agree- Supplementary Information The online version contains supplemen- ment. J Clean Prod 187:960–973. https://doi.or g/10.1016/j.jclep tary material available at https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11625-02 1-00905-2 . ro.2018.03.107 Birat J (2011) The sustainability footprint of steelmaking. Steel Times Int 35:42 Acknowledgments This research was supported by the Environment Davis SJ, Lewis NS, Shaner M, Aggarwal S, Arent D, Azevedo IL Research and Technology Development (JPMEERF20172004) of et al (2018) Net-zero emissions energy systems. Science. https the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. ://doi.org/10.1126/scien ce.aas97 93 MS and YJ were also supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number ECRA (European Cement Research Academy, 2017). CSI/ECRA- JP20H04395. KO was also supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Num- technology papers 2017: development of state of the art tech- ber JP20K14860, the Environmental Research and Technology Devel- niques in cement manufacturing: trying to look ahead. http:// opment Fund (JPMEERF20201002) of the Environmental Restoration docs.wbcsd .or g/2017/06/CSI_ECRA_T ec hn ology _P aper and Conservation Agency of Japan. DSH was supported by Strategic s_2017.pdf Operation Fund and Strategic Research Fund of IGES, and by Environ- EECRstee. (2011) Proceedings of the first international conference on ment Research and Technology Development (JPMEERF20201002) energy efficiency and CO reduction in the steel industry, HIsarna of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. Pilot Plant Project, Meijer, K., Guenther, C., Dry, R.J., 27 June to 1 July 2011, Dusseldorf, 2011. Author contributions MS and JY conceived of the study. DSH, EK, Ehrlich PR, Holdren JP (1971) Impact of population growth. Obstet KO, and YM conducted model runs. JY produced figures. JY and Gynecol Surv 26(11):769. https ://doi.or g/10.1097/00006 254- MS wrote the manuscript, which was edited and approved by all the 19711 1000-00014 authors. European Commission (2013) Technology map of the european strate- gic energy technology plan (SET-Plan). https ://ec.europ a.eu/jrc/ en/print pdf/15540 2 Fischedick M, Marzinkowski J, Winzer P, Weigel M (2014) Techno- Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- economic evaluation of innovative steel production technolo- bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta- gies. J Clean Prod 84:563–580. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclep tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long ro.2014.05.063 as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, Fujimori S, Kainuma M, Masui T, Hasegawa T, Dai H (2014) The provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes effectiveness of energy service demand reduction: a scenario were made. The images or other third party material in this article are analysis of global climate change mitigation. Energy Policy included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated 75:379–391. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol .2014.09.015 otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in 1 3 426 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 Gartner E, Sui T (2017) Alternative cement clinkers. Cem Concr Res. JCA (2014) Low carbon society action plan phase II (cement industry). https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemco nres.2017.02.002http://www.jcass oc.or.jp/cemen t/4pdf/jg1k_03.pdf GoJ (Government of Japan, 2015). Submission of Japan’s intended JISF (Japan Iron and Steel Federation) (2014) Low carbon society nationally determined contribution (INDC). http://www4. action plan phase II (iron and steel industry). https ://www.jisf. unfcc c.int/submi ssion s/INDC/ Published%20Documents/or.jp/busin ess/ondan ka/kouke n/keika ku/docum ents/14111 2.pdf Japan/1/20150717_Japan’s%20INDC.pdf. JISF (2019) Long-term vision for climate change mitigation A chal- GoJ (2016) The plan for global warming countermeasure. http://www. lenge towards zero-carbon steel, 2019. http://www.jisf.or.jp/busin env.go.jp/press /files /jp/10281 6.pdf [in Japanese]ess/ondan ka/zeroc arbon steel / Grubler A, Wilson C, Bento N, Boza-kiss B, Krey V, Mccollum DL Kawase R, Matsuoka Y (2015) Steel production estimation in Japan et al (2018) A low energy demand scenario for meeting the 15 °C with considering global market, Proceedings of the Civil Engi- target and sustainable development goals without negative emis- neering Society (Environment), vol 71, No. 5, I_383–394. https: // sion technologies. Nat Energy. https ://doi.or g/10.1038/s4156 www.jstag e.jst.go.jp/artic le/jscej er/71/5/71_I_383/_pdf 0-018-0172-6 Kaya Y (1990) Impact of carbon dioxide emission control on GNP Hertwich EG, Coauthors. (2019) Material efficiency strategies to growth: interpretation of proposed scenarios. In: paper presented reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with buildings, to the IPCC energy and industry subgroup, response strategies vehicles, and electronics—a review. Environ Res Lett. https :// working group. doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0fe 3 Kuramochi T, Ramírez A, Turkenburg W, Faaij A (2012) Compara- Hills TP, Sceats M, Rennie D, Fennell P (2017) LEILAC: Low cost tive assessment of CO capture technologies for carbon-intensive CO capture for the cement and lime industries. Energy procedia, industrial processes. Prog Energy Combust Sci 38(1):87–112. vol 114. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 6166–6170https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2011.05.001 Hills T, Leeson D, Florin N, Fennell P (2016) Carbon capture in the Kuramochi T (2016) Assessment of midterm C O emissions reduction cement industry: technologies, progress, and retrofitting. Environ potential in the iron and steel industry : a case of Japan. J Clean Sci Technol 50:368–377. https://doi.or g/10.1021/acs.est.5b03508 Prod 132:81–97. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclep ro.2015.02.055 ICAP (International Carbon Action Partnership) (2020a) Japan— Kuriyama A, Tamura K, Kuramochi T (2019) Can Japan enhance its saitama target setting emissions trading system. https://icapcar- 2030 greenhouse gas emission reduction targets? Assessment bonaction.com/en/?option=com_etsmap&task=export&format= of economic and energy-related assumptions in Japan’s NDC. pdf&layout=list&systems[]=84 Energy Policy 130(April):328–340. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . ICAP (2020b) Japan—Tokyo cap-and-trade program. https://icapcar-enpol .2019.03.055 bonaction.com/en/?option=com_etsmap&task=export&format= LANDES (2011) Product details of CO -SUICOM. https://www .lande pdf&layout=list&systems[]=51s.co.jp/produ ct/113 ICEF (Innovation for Cool Earth Forum) (2016) ICEF innovation Leeson D, Fennell P, Shah N, Petit C, Mac Dowell N (2017) A Techno- roadmap 1.0: CO utilization and ZEB/ZEH roadmaps released economic analysis and systematic review of carbon capture and at COP22. https ://www .icef-for um .or g/platf or m/ar tic le_de t ai storage (CCS) applied to the iron and steel, cement, oil refining l.php?artic le__id=109 and pulp and paper industries. Int J Greenh Gas Control 61:71–84. IEA (International Energy Agency) (2016) World energy balances https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc .2017.03.020 2016. OECD Publishing, Paris. https ://doi.org/10.1787/97892 Lehne J, Preston F (2018) Making concrete change innovation in low- 64263 116-en carbon cement and concrete. Chatham House Rep. https ://doi. IEA (2017a) Energy technology perspectives 2017—executive sum-org/10.1088/1742-6596/1015/3/03216 3 mary. International Energy Agency (IEA) Publications, 371. Doi: Mccollum DL, Gambhir A, Rogelj J, Wilson C (2020) Energy mod- https ://doi.org/10.1787/energ y_tech-2014-en ellers should explore extremes more. Nat Energy. https ://doi. IEA (2017) Renewable Energy for Industry: From green energy to org/10.1038/s4156 0-020-0555-3 green materials and fuels. OECD Publishing, Paris. https ://doi. McMillan C, Boardman R, McKellar M, Sabharwall P, Ruth M, Bragg- org/10.3138/97814 87595 753-006 Sitton S (2016) Generation and use of thermal energy in the US IEA (2019) Tracking industry, IEA, Paris https ://www.iea.org/repor industrial sector and opportunities to reduce its carbon emissions. ts/track ing-indus try METI (Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry) (2013) Japan’s pol- IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2014) Fifth icy on energy conservation. https://enek en.ieej.or .jp/data/4746.pdf assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate METI (2015a) Top runner program: developing the world’s best energy change. Cambridge University Press 2014. https ://www.ipcc.ch/ efficient appliance and more. 2015. https ://www .enec h o.me ti. site/asset s/uploa ds/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_full.pdfgo.jp/categ ory/savin g_and_new/savin g/data/topru nner2 015e.pdf IPCC (2018) Proposed outline of the special report in 2018 on the METI (2015b) Chouki enerugi jyukyu mitoshi (long-term energy out- impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels look, in Japanese). The subcommittee on long-term energy supply and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the con- and demand outlook. https ://www.enech o.meti.go.jp/commi ttee/ text of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate counc il/basic _polic y_subco mmitt ee/mitos hi/pdf/repor t_01.pdf cha. IPCC - Sr15, 2(October), 17–20. www.enviro nment algra phit METI (2016) Long-term global warming counter measure platform i.org (Choki Chikyu Ondanka Taisaku Prattohommu). http://www.meti. IPSS (2017) Population Projections for Japan (2017): 2016 to 2065. go.jp/press /2017/04/20170 41400 6/20170 41400 6-1.pdf. National Institute of Population and Social Security Research METI (2017) Connected industries Tokyo initiative 2017, https://www . JBF (Japan Business Federation) (2019). KEIDANREN’s commitment meti.go.jp/policy/mono_inf o_service/conne cted_indus tr ies/inde x to a low carbon society fiscal 2018 follow-up results. https://www . .html keida nren.or.jp/polic y/vape.html METI (2018) Fifth energy basic plan. https ://www.enech o.meti.go.jp/ JBF (2014) Low carbon society action plan independent evaluation categ ory/other s/basic _plan/#head committee evaluation report. https ://www.keida nren.or.jp/polic METI (2019a) 2018 annual report on energy (energy white paper), y/2015/039.pdfhttps ://www.enech o.meti.go.jp/about /white paper / JCA (Japan Cement Association) (2013) Cement industry’s efforts to METI (2019b) Large-scale CCS Demonstration Project in Hokkaido combat global warming. http://www.jcass oc.or.jp/seisa nkank yo/ Prefecture, Successfully Injects 300,000 Tons of CO2 cumula- seisa n02/pdf/seisa n02_01.pdf tively, https://www .meti.go.jp/english/pr ess/2019/1125_004.html 1 3 Sustainability Science (2021) 16:411–427 427 METI (2019c) Innovative Environmental Innovation Strategy. https Sakamoto S, Nagai Y, Sugiyama M et al (2021) End-use decarboniza- ://www.meti.go.jp/shing ikai/energ y_envir onmen t/kanky o_innov tion and electrification: EMF 35 JMIP study. Sustain Sci. ation /003.html Scrivener KL, John VM, Gartner EM (2018) Eco-efficient cements: METI (2020) 2019 Manufacturing white paper (annual report based potential economically viable solutions for a low-CO on article 8 of the basic act on the promotion of basic manufac- cement-based materials industry. Cem Concr Res. https ://doi. turing technology). https ://www .me ti.go.jp/r epor t/white paper /org/10.1145/23702 16.23702 32 mono/2019/index .html Sugiyama M, Akashi O, Wada K, Kanudia A, Li J, Weyant J (2014) MOE (Ministry of the Environment) (2007) Keynote speech by ichiro Energy efficiency potentials for global climate change mitiga- kamoshita, minister of the environment of Japan. 2007. https :// tion. Clim Change 123(3e4):397. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1058 www.env.go.jp/earth/g8/en/mee ting/img/K eynote%20Spe ec h%20 4-013-0874-5 by%20Ichir o%20Kamoshit a%20in%20t he%20Ses sion%20on%20 Sugiyama M, Fujimori S, Wada K et al (2019) Japan’s long-term cli- Cli mate%20Cha nge.pdf mate mitigation policy: multi-model assessment and sectoral chal- MOE (2008) Action plan for creating a low-carbon society. http://www. lenges. Energy 167(2019):1120–1131. https ://doi.org/10.1016/J. env.go.jp/press /file_view.php?seria l=11912 &hou_id=10025 ENERG Y.2018.10.091 MOE (2014) Tax to combat global warming. https ://www.env.go.jp/ Sugiyama M, Fujimori S, Wada K, Oshiro K, Kato E, Komiyama R, polic y/tax/faq.html Silva Herran D, Matsuo Y, Shiraki H, Ju Y (2021) EMF 35 JMIP MOE (2016a) Long-term, low-carbon vision. http:// www.env.go.jp/ study for Japan’slong-term climate and energy policy: scenario press /10382 2/10547 8.pdf designs and key findings. Sustain Sci MOE (2016b) global warming countermeasures plan (Japanese Cabinet UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization) (2016). Decision). https ://www.env.go.jp/press /10251 2.html Industrial development report 2016: the role of technology and MOE (2019a) Long-term growth strategy based on the Paris Agree- innovation in inclusive and sustainable industrial development. ment, https ://www.env.go.jp/press /10686 9.html UNIDO. https ://www .unido .or g/sites /def au lt/f iles /2015-12/ MOE (2019b) 2018 annual report on environment (environment white EBOOK _IDR20 16_FULLR EPORT _0.pdf paper), http://www.env.go.jp/polic y/hakus yo/ UNIDO (2018). Industrial development report 2018. Demand for Moore J (2017) Thermal hydrogen: an emissions free hydrocarbon manufacturing: driving inclusive and sustainable industrial devel- economy. Int J Hydrogen Energy 42:12047–12063. https ://doi. opment. https ://www.unido .org/resou rces-publi catio ns-flags hip- org/10.1016/j.ijhyd ene.2017.03.182publicatio ns-indus tr ial-de velopmen t-r eport-ser ies/indus tr ial-de vel Nameki M, Moriguchi Y (2014) Recent developments in efforts to opmen t-repor t-2018 reduce GHG emissions in the iron and steel sector and their poten- Van Sluisveld M, De Boer HS, Hof A, Van Vuuren D, Schneider C, tial reductions in major producer countries. In: Proceedings of the Lechtenboehmer S (2019) Comparing quantitative industry decar- annual conference of the Japan Institute of Energy, vol 23(0), pp bonization perspectives towards 2050 for Europe. IAMC 12th 254–255. Doi: https://doi.or g/10.20550/jie taik aiyoushi .23.0_254 Annual Meeting, Tsukuba, Japan. https ://www.iamco nsort ium. NEDO (New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organi-org/wp-conte nt/uploa ds/2020/03/van_Sluis veld_NEW.pdf zation) (2018) Open innovation white paper. https ://www.nedo. Vogl V, Åhman M, Nilsson LJ (2018) Assessment of hydrogen direct go.jp/libra ry/open_innov ation _hakus yo.html reduction for fossil-free steelmaking. J Clean Prod 203:736–745. NEDO (2019) Annual report of the development of environmentally https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclep ro.2018.08.279 friendly process technology in Japan. https ://www .nedo.go.jp/ Wakabayashi M, Arimura TH (2016) Voluntary agreements to encour- conte nt/10090 5230.pdf age proactive fi rm action against climate change: an empirical Nikkei (2020) ArcelorMittal: steelmaking without coal, 5 trillion yen study of industry associations’ voluntary action plans in Japan. investment on natural gas and hydrogen. 2020.09.30. https: //www. J Clean Prod 112:2885–2895. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.jclep nikke i.com/artic le/DGKKZ O6437 1720Z 20C20 A9TJ2 000/ ro.2015.10.071 Oda J, Akimoto K, Sano F, Tomoda T (2007) Diffusion of energy World Steel Association (2019) World Steel in Figures 2019. https :// efficient technologies and CO emission reductions in iron and www .w or ld s teel .or g/en/dam/jcr :96d7a 585-e6b2-4d63-b943-4cd9a steel sector. Energy Econ 29:868–888. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.b621a 91/World %2520S teel%2520i n%2520F igure s%25202 019. eneco .2007.01.003 pdf. Oda J, Akimoto K (2019) Analysis of energy intensity of basic materi- Yamaji K, Matsuhashi M, Nagata Y, Kaya Y (1991) An integrated als industry in Japan. In: local energy, global markets, 42nd IAEE system for CO / energy/GNP analysis: case studies on economic international conference, May 29-June 1, 2019. International measures for C O reduction in Japan. Workshop on CO Reduc- 2 2 Association for Energy Economics. tion and Removal: Measures for the Next Century. 19–21 March Oshiro K, Gi K, Fujimori S et al (2019) Mid-century emission path- 1991. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Lax- ways in Japan associated with the global 2°C goal: national enburg, Austria. and global models’ assessments based on carbon budgets. Clim Change. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1058 4-019-02490 -x Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to Peters GP, Andrew RM, Canadell JG, Fuss S, Jackson RB, Korsbakken jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. JI et al (2017) Key indicators to track current progress and future ambition of the Paris Agreement. Nat Clim Change. https ://doi. org/10.1038/NCLIM ATE32 02 1 3

Journal

Sustainability Science – Springer Journals

Published: Feb 16, 2021

There are no references for this article.