IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v52y2015ipap87-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Japanese fuel mix strategy after disaster of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant: Lessons from international comparison among industrial nations measured by DEA environmental assessment in time horizon

Author

Listed:
  • Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki
  • Goto, Mika

Abstract

On June 1, 2015, the Japanese government has announced that the fuel mix will consist of nuclear generation with a range between 20% and 22% and renewable generation with a range between 22% and 24% of the total electricity generation by 2030. A difficulty in understanding the governmental future energy plan is that it does not contain any scientific evidence concerning why Japan needs to maintain the amount of nuclear generation and that of renewable at the level between 20% and 22% and between 22% and 24%, respectively. To investigate the future energy plan, this study uses Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) as a methodology. The proposed DEA approach incorporates the property of “translation invariance”. The property indicates that an efficiency measure should not be influenced even if inputs and/or outputs are shifted toward a same direction by adding or subtracting a specific real number. The property makes it possible that we can evaluate the performance of organizations, whose production factors (i.e., inputs, desirable and undesirable outputs) contain many zeros and negative values in a data set. Such an occurrence of zero and negative in production factors is widely observed in many DEA performance evaluations. This study first uses the desirable property for DEA environmental assessment in a time horizon. The proposed DEA environmental assessment identifies that the reasonable ranges for Japanese future fuel mix are (a) combustible fuel generation within the range between 34.5% and 56.1%, (b) hydro generation within the range between 22.4% and 40.5%, (c) nuclear generation within the range between 10.4% and 13.7%, (d) pumped hydro generation within the range between 3.9% and 6.9% and (e) renewable generation within the range between 3.7% and 8.4%, all of which are measured by these generation capacities. It is clearly identified that the future fuel mix proposed by the Japanese government is inconsistent with the estimated one, which we determine by relatively comparing it with the energy structures of 33 industrial nations. The comparison indicates that the Japanese future energy plan will be too ambitious to implement the future goal. It is easily envisioned that the energy plan will have a considerable difficulty in future. It is hoped that the electric power industry can access drastic technological advancements, including eco-technology innovation, and then Japan will be able to change the future direction on fuel mix as the government expects.

Suggested Citation

  • Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "Japanese fuel mix strategy after disaster of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant: Lessons from international comparison among industrial nations measured by DEA environmental assessment in time hori," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 87-103.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:52:y:2015:i:pa:p:87-103
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2015.09.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988315002509
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Wang, Derek, 2014. "Radial and non-radial approaches for environmental assessment by Data Envelopment Analysis: Corporate sustainability and effective investment for technology innovation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 537-551.
    2. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2009. "Methodological comparison between DEA (data envelopment analysis) and DEA-DA (discriminant analysis) from the perspective of bankruptcy assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 561-575, December.
    3. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2014. "DEA radial measurement for environmental assessment: A comparative study between Japanese chemical and pharmaceutical firms," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 502-513.
    4. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "DEA radial and non-radial models for unified efficiency under natural and managerial disposability: Theoretical extension by strong complementary slackness conditions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 700-713.
    5. Zhang, Ning & Zhou, P. & Choi, Yongrok, 2013. "Energy efficiency, CO2 emission performance and technology gaps in fossil fuel electricity generation in Korea: A meta-frontier non-radial directional distance functionanalysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 653-662.
    6. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2010. "Should the US clean air act include CO2 emission control?: Examination by data envelopment analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5902-5911, October.
    7. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2001. "Slack-adjusted DEA for time series analysis: Performance measurement of Japanese electric power generation industry in 1984-1993," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 232-259, January.
    8. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2010. "Measurement of a linkage among environmental, operational, and financial performance in Japanese manufacturing firms: A use of Data Envelopment Analysis with strong complementary slackness condition," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1742-1753, December.
    9. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "Returns to Scale, Damages to Scale, Marginal Rate of Transformation and Rate of Substitution in DEA Environmental Assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 905-917.
    10. Goto, Mika & Otsuka, Akihiro & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 2014. "DEA (Data Envelopment Analysis) assessment of operational and environmental efficiencies on Japanese regional industries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 535-549.
    11. Franco, Alessandro & Diaz, Ana R., 2009. "The future challenges for “clean coal technologies”: Joining efficiency increase and pollutant emission control," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 348-354.
    12. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2013. "DEA environmental assessment in a time horizon: Malmquist index on fuel mix, electricity and CO2 of industrial nations," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 370-382.
    13. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "Efficiency-based rank assessment for electric power industry: A combined use of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and DEA-Discriminant Analysis (DA)," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 634-644.
    14. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "Weak and strong disposability vs. natural and managerial disposability in DEA environmental assessment: Comparison between Japanese electric power industry and manufacturing industries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 686-699.
    15. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2009. "Can environmental investment and expenditure enhance financial performance of US electric utility firms under the clean air act amendment of 1990?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4819-4826, November.
    16. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2011. "Operational synergy in the US electric utility industry under an influence of deregulation policy: A linkage to financial performance and corporate value," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 699-713, February.
    17. Min, Daiki & Chung, Jaewoo, 2013. "Evaluation of the long-term power generation mix: The case study of South Korea's energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1544-1552.
    18. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2011. "DEA approach for unified efficiency measurement: Assessment of Japanese fossil fuel power generation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 292-303, March.
    19. Nag, Barnali, 2006. "Estimation of carbon baselines for power generation in India: the supply side approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 1399-1410, August.
    20. Korhonen, Pekka J. & Luptacik, Mikulas, 2004. "Eco-efficiency analysis of power plants: An extension of data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(2), pages 437-446, April.
    21. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "DEA radial measurement for environmental assessment and planning: Desirable procedures to evaluate fossil fuel power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 422-432.
    22. Wang, Derek & Li, Shanling & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 2014. "DEA environmental assessment on U.S. Industrial sectors: Investment for improvement in operational and environmental performance to attain corporate sustainability," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 254-267.
    23. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2009. "Can R&D expenditure avoid corporate bankruptcy? Comparison between Japanese machinery and electric equipment industries using DEA-discriminant analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(1), pages 289-311, July.
    24. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika & Sugiyama, Manabu, 2013. "DEA window analysis for environmental assessment in a dynamic time shift: Performance assessment of U.S. coal-fired power plants," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 845-857.
    25. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "Returns to Scale and Damages to Scale with Strong Complementary Slackness Conditions in DEA Assessment: Japanese Corporate Effort on Environment Protection," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1422-1434.
    26. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2014. "Investment strategy for sustainable society by development of regional economies and prevention of industrial pollutions in Japanese manufacturing sectors," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 299-312.
    27. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan, 2015. "China's regional sustainability and diversified resource allocation: DEA environmental assessment on economic development and air pollution," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 239-256.
    28. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Sekitani, Kazuyuki, 2009. "An occurrence of multiple projections in DEA-based measurement of technical efficiency: Theoretical comparison among DEA models from desirable properties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(2), pages 764-794, July.
    29. Zhou, Yan & Xing, Xinpeng & Fang, Kuangnan & Liang, Dapeng & Xu, Chunlin, 2013. "Environmental efficiency analysis of power industry in China based on an entropy SBM model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 68-75.
    30. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika & Shang, Jennifer, 2009. "Core business concentration vs. corporate diversification in the US electric utility industry: Synergy and deregulation effects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4583-4594, November.
    31. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2013. "A comparative study among fossil fuel power plants in PJM and California ISO by DEA environmental assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 130-145.
    32. Kunsch, Pierre L. & Friesewinkel, Jean, 2014. "Nuclear energy policy in Belgium after Fukushima," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 462-474.
    33. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "DEA environmental assessment in time horizon: Radial approach for Malmquist index measurement on petroleum companies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 329-345.
    34. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "DEA environmental assessment of coal fired power plants: Methodological comparison between radial and non-radial models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1854-1863.
    35. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan, 2015. "Comparison among U.S. industrial sectors by DEA environmental assessment: Equipped with analytical capability to handle zero or negative in production factors," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 69-86.
    36. Pierre Louis Kunsch & Jean Friesewinkel, 2014. "Nuclear energy policy in Belgium after Fukushima," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/189447, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    37. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2014. "Environmental assessment for corporate sustainability by resource utilization and technology innovation: DEA radial measurement on Japanese industrial sectors," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 295-307.
    38. Mou, Dunguo, 2014. "Understanding China’s electricity market reform from the perspective of the coal-fired power disparity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 224-234.
    39. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "Returns to scale and damages to scale on U.S. fossil fuel power plants: Radial and non-radial approaches for DEA environmental assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 2240-2259.
    40. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2008. "A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 1-18, August.
    41. Portugal-Pereira, Joana & Esteban, Miguel, 2014. "Implications of paradigm shift in Japan’s electricity security of supply: A multi-dimensional indicator assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 424-434.
    42. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "Data envelopment analysis for environmental assessment: Comparison between public and private ownership in petroleum industry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(3), pages 668-678.
    43. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2009. "DEA-DA for bankruptcy-based performance assessment: Misclassification analysis of Japanese construction industry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 576-594, December.
    44. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika & Ueno, Takahiro, 2010. "Performance analysis of US coal-fired power plants by measuring three DEA efficiencies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1675-1688, April.
    45. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "Environmental assessment by DEA radial measurement: U.S. coal-fired power plants in ISO (Independent System Operator) and RTO (Regional Transmission Organization)," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 663-676.
    46. Boccard, Nicolas, 2014. "The cost of nuclear electricity: France after Fukushima," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 450-461.
    47. Fare, Rolf, et al, 1989. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons When Some Outputs Are Undesirable: A Nonparametric Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(1), pages 90-98, February.
    48. Glover, Fred & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 2009. "Contributions of Professor William W. Cooper in Operations Research and Management Science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 1-16, August.
    49. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    50. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Wang, Derek, 2014. "Sustainability development for supply chain management in U.S. petroleum industry by DEA environmental assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 360-374.
    51. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "Returns to scale and damages to scale under natural and managerial disposability: Strategy, efficiency and competitiveness of petroleum firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 645-662.
    52. Sarıca, Kemal & Or, Ilhan, 2007. "Efficiency assessment of Turkish power plants using data envelopment analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1484-1499.
    53. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Aoki, Shingo, 2001. "A use of a nonparametric statistic for DEA frontier shift: the Kruskal and Wallis rank test," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-18, February.
    54. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2013. "Returns to scale vs. damages to scale in data envelopment analysis: An impact of U.S. clean air act on coal-fired power plants," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 164-175.
    55. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2014. "Photovoltaic power stations in Germany and the United States: A comparative study by data envelopment analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 271-288.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan & Goto, Mika, 2017. "A literature study for DEA applied to energy and environment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 104-124.
    2. repec:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:11:p:2078-:d:119417 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan, 2016. "Returns to damage under undesirable congestion and damages to return under desirable congestion measured by DEA environmental assessment with multiplier restriction: Economic and energy planning for s," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 288-309.
    4. repec:eee:appene:v:228:y:2018:i:c:p:2308-2320 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:eee:eneeco:v:67:y:2017:i:c:p:554-571 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:eee:eneeco:v:66:y:2017:i:c:p:154-166 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. repec:eee:eneeco:v:72:y:2018:i:c:p:276-289 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. repec:eee:enepol:v:123:y:2018:i:c:p:8-18 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:3:p:732-:d:135108 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2016. "Undesirable congestion under natural disposability and desirable congestion under managerial disposability in U.S. electric power industry measured by DEA environmental assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 173-188.
    11. repec:eee:appene:v:220:y:2018:i:c:p:527-535 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. repec:eee:eneeco:v:64:y:2017:i:c:p:306-320 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan, 2015. "Comparison among U.S. industrial sectors by DEA environmental assessment: Equipped with analytical capability to handle zero or negative in production factors," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 69-86.
    14. repec:eee:eneeco:v:67:y:2017:i:c:p:439-453 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. repec:eee:eneeco:v:65:y:2017:i:c:p:389-398 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan, 2016. "Marginal Rate of Transformation and Rate of Substitution measured by DEA environmental assessment: Comparison among European and North American nations," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 270-287.
    17. repec:eee:ejores:v:264:y:2018:i:1:p:1-16 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Fuel mix; DEA; Environmental assessment; Fukushima Daiichi;

    JEL classification:

    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:52:y:2015:i:pa:p:87-103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.