Ryota Kuzuki
Tokyo Gas Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
Shuzo Murakami
Building Research Institute, Tsukuba, Japan
Toshiharu Ikaga
Keio University, Yokohama, Japan
Satoru Sadohara
Yokohama National University, Yokohama, Japan
Satoshi Yoshida
Yokohama National University, Yokohama, Japan
Toru Ichikawa
Tokyo Gas Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
Yoshio Kato
Nihon Sekkei Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
Tsutsumi Tanaka
Nihon Sekkei Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
Yuichi Ikuta
Japan Environmental Systems Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
Ken Aozasa
Institute of Building Environment and Energy Conservation, Tokyo, Japan
Amr O. Elsayed
College of Engineering, University of Dammam, Saudi Arabia
Abdulrahman S. Hariri
College of Engineering, University of Dammam, Saudi Arabia
Jørgen K. Knudsen
SINTEF Energy Research, Norway
Helene Egeland
SINTEF Energy Research, Norway
Gerd B. Jacobsen
SINTEF Energy Research, Norway
Audun Ruud
SINTEF Energy Research, Norway
William M. Lafferty
SINTEF Energy Research, Norway
Joseph Ikwebe
Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
Adam P. Harvey
Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
Download article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3384/ecp110573396Published in: World Renewable Energy Congress - Sweden; 8-13 May; 2011; Linköping; Sweden
Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 57:51, p. 3396-3403
Published: 2011-11-03
ISBN: 978-91-7393-070-3
ISSN: 1650-3686 (print), 1650-3740 (online)
To achieve the Kyoto Protocol target of carbon reduction in Japan; additional measures beyond individual building-scale are strongly required. Area-wide energy utilization is expected to play an important role; not only in improving energy efficiency; but also in enhancing utilization of renewable energy and unused thermal energy toward a low-carbon society. But so far there have been few initiatives that have been realized. One of the major hurdles is the lack of methods to convince stakeholders to collaborate towards implementation. This study focuses on non-energy benefits (NEBs); which are indirect benefits such as stimulating regional economies and environmental protection; as distinguished from the direct energy-benefit (EB) of utility costs reduction.
Through the development of methods to classify and quantify various NEBs and to assign monetary values in the marginal abatement cost (MAC); area-wide energy utilization has been deemed to be more competitive among various carbon reduction measures. Customized marginal abatement cost curve evaluation has proven effective for encouraging stakeholders to implement.
Area-wide energy utilization; Non-energy benefit; Marginal abatement cost; Cost benefit ratio; Payback time
[1] Cabinet Secretariat Japan; Global Warming Prevention Headquarters; “Kyoto Protocol Target Achievement Plan;” April 2005
[2] Cabinet Secretariat Japan; Council on the Global Warming Issue: submitted papers at “Mid-term Targets Examination Committee” (Nov. 2008 - April 2009).
[3] McKinsey & Company: “Pathways to a Low-Carbon Economy: Version 2 of the Global Greenhouse Gas Abatement Cost Curve;” January 2009
[4] Bement Dawn and Lisa A. Skumatz: “New Non-Energy Benefits (NEBs) Results in the Commercial/Industrial sectors;” ECEEE 2007 Summer Study Proceedings; pp.1551-1559; June 2007
[5] R. Kuzuki; S. Murakami; et. al.: Improving Sustainability of Building Blocks by Extended Use of Decentralized Combined Heat and Power Systems; Proceedings of the 2008 World Sustainable Building Conference Vol.2; pp.3347-3354; 2008.12
[6] Central Environment Council; Global Environment Committee; Targets Reduction Scenario Subcommittee; Mid-term Report; June 2001
[7] Coalition of Japanese Local Governments for Environment Initiative and the Institute for Environmental Planning Inc.; “2008 Local Government White Paper on the Environment;” Coalition of Local Governments for Environment Initiative Secretariat; May 2008
