Key Points
- Geopolitical Shift in Emissions: While developed nations historically drove CO2 emissions, the current surge is dominated by rapidly developing Asian nations like China and India, necessitating a shift from the Kyoto Protocol’s rigid caps to the Paris Agreement’s “pledge and review” system.
- The “Carbon Economy” as a Financial Tool: The push for global emissions trading and carbon pricing was heavily driven by European financial hubs, particularly London, aiming to establish carbon as a new tradable financial commodity.
- Japan’s High-Efficiency Technology: Despite international criticism of its coal use, Japan possesses world-leading Ultra-Supercritical (USC) coal power technology, which emits significantly less CO2 than older plants in developing nations and represents a highly cost-effective global mitigation tool.
- The Crucial Role of Adaptation: Climate policy must balance emissions reduction (mitigation) with realistic adaptation strategies, particularly for developing nations where basic infrastructure, food security, and local economic realities must take precedence over advanced green technologies.
Full Transcript (English)
Keisuke Murakami: Alright, today let’s talk about global warming, following up on our previous discussion about coal-fired power. By the way, does anyone here know about COP15 or the Copenhagen Accord? It feels like ancient history now. Back in 1988—most of you weren’t even born yet—people first started warning that global warming was progressing. Back then, the sensational headline was that sea levels would rise by one meter, submerging the Maldives. Amidst such sensationalism, discussions began on how many degrees temperatures would rise.
Since then, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was established in 1992, and based on its provisions, the Kyoto Protocol was adopted in 1997 to determine specific methods. However, realizing the Kyoto framework had limitations, negotiations began around 2009 to transition to what would eventually become the Paris Agreement. I was the director in charge at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) during COP15, COP16, and COP17, flying all over the world. Today, I’d like to share what I learned back then, along with some of the absurdities I witnessed.
From their perspective, I might have been the absurd one. Have you heard of the “Fossil of the Day” award? Quite a few of you have. They still hand it out. To make a point, they often show people holding the Japanese flag, though no Japanese government representative actually goes to accept it. It’s just a performance at international conferences to criticize Japan for not being green enough. They love to make a show of it. Since fossil fuels are seen as the enemy of global warming, they almost always give the “Fossil” award to Japan. Japan wins it nearly every year. But is Japan really doing as poorly as they say?
Let’s look at CO2 emissions. Before the Industrial Revolution, emissions were almost zero. Then they surged. If you look at this period, developed nations led the Industrial Revolution, burning coal and releasing massive amounts of CO2, warming the planet. This is a fact. From the perspective of developing nations, developed countries are the ones who caused this mess, so they should pay. This was the basic premise.
In response, developed nations agreed under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to set binding targets. But around 2009, during COP15, it became clear that efforts by developed nations alone wouldn’t suffice. Emissions from Asia, particularly China and India, were skyrocketing. Even if developed nations restricted themselves, it would be meaningless if China and India kept emitting without limits. We needed a framework to include them. That was the core battle of COP15.
Let’s briefly review why global warming occurs. Can anyone explain it? You don’t have to speak, just raise your hand if you generally know. Thank you. Essentially, greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, preventing it from escaping into space, causing the Earth to heat up. CO2 is the standard, but methane is 25 times more potent than CO2. Do you know the main source of methane?
Yes, livestock. Specifically, cow burps. In countries like Australia and New Zealand, cow burps make up a huge portion of their emissions. It sounds funny, but it’s a serious issue because methane’s warming effect per unit is so high. There are other gases like HFCs and PFCs as well. So, how much has the temperature actually risen? It has risen by about 1.09°C since the pre-industrial era. Some data suggests it’s even higher now. Roughly speaking, it has risen by 1 to 2 degrees Celsius.
What lies ahead? The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), which is a group of scientists, has outlined several scenarios. In the worst-case scenario, temperatures could rise by up to 5.7°C by 2100. What does a 5-degree rise actually mean? Let’s look at Japan. The average temperature in Hokkaido is currently 9.2°C, while Tokyo is 15.8°C. A 5-degree rise means Hokkaido’s climate becomes like Tokyo’s. Tokyo would become sub-tropical, somewhere between Kagoshima (18°C) and Okinawa (23°C). That is incredibly hot.
Even a 1-degree rise has a massive impact. When I was a child, temperatures rarely reached the high 30s. Now, 40°C is becoming common. The impact of a 1-degree average rise is huge. Think of it like human body temperature—the difference between 36°C and 37°C is significant. Why does warming cause sea levels to rise? One reason is the melting of glaciers and ice sheets, particularly on land. Another major factor is the thermal expansion of seawater.
Sea levels have risen by about 20 centimeters over the past century. While 20 cm might not sound like much, it has already drastically altered marine ecosystems. For example, salmon are moving further north, and tuna are now being caught in Toyama. While some might think, “Great, we can catch tuna now,” it’s not that simple. Fishing boats designed for salmon cannot easily switch to tuna; they don’t have the right equipment. Ecosystem changes disrupt entire industries. Furthermore, rising sea temperatures have caused an explosion in sea urchin populations. Sea urchins are voracious eaters; they even eat kelp forests and damage concrete structures, destroying habitats for other marine life. In Toyama, they are trying to harvest these urchins and raise them on land using agricultural waste to turn a nuisance into a business, while allowing the kelp forests and tuna to return.
Now, let’s look at Japan’s emissions. Energy-related CO2 accounts for about 84% of Japan’s greenhouse gas emissions. Since the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, Japan has actually made significant progress in reducing emissions, particularly in the power and industrial sectors. Steelmaking is a major emitter. Blast furnaces use coke to reduce iron ore, emitting massive amounts of CO2. Electric arc furnaces, which recycle scrap steel using electricity, also emit CO2 depending on the power source. Improving energy efficiency and utilizing waste heat are crucial.
This is a flow chart of Japan’s energy. It shows coal, oil, natural gas, and renewables. Coal is primarily used for power generation. Natural gas (LNG) is used for both power and city gas. Oil is mostly used for transportation and petrochemicals. Currently, there is a shortage of petrochemical raw materials, affecting things like automotive paint and repair parts. If you look at the power sector, coal, oil, and gas make up about 69% of Japan’s electricity generation. Renewables make up about 23%, and nuclear is around 9%.
Japan turned to LNG in the 1970s following the oil shocks to diversify away from oil. LNG requires massive infrastructure to liquefy, transport at -162°C, and regasify. Because of the high cost of this infrastructure, Japan was historically one of the few countries that could afford it, at one point consuming over half of the world’s LNG. Now, with the global push for decarbonization, other countries are competing for LNG, driving up prices. Meanwhile, hydro power has remained stable at around 7-8%, while other renewables, led by solar, have grown to over 15%.
If we compare CO2 emissions per kilowatt-hour across different power sources, coal is the highest, followed by oil and LNG. Therefore, there is strong international pressure to phase out coal. However, not all coal power is the same. Japan’s coal-fired power plants use Ultra-Supercritical (USC) technology, which operates at extremely high temperatures and pressures, making them the most efficient in the world. Japan’s USC plants emit far less CO2 per unit of electricity than older plants in India or China.
When I was at METI, I worked to export this high-efficiency coal technology to developing nations like India. However, we faced fierce competition from China, which offered cheaper plants backed by massive state financing. In India, I remember visiting the Ministry of Power, and even their headquarters suffered a blackout during our meeting. It showed how desperate they were for stable power. But why is the international community so intent on banning coal entirely, regardless of efficiency?
To understand this, we must look at the concept of the Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curve. This curve plots different emission reduction measures, from cheap ones that actually save money (like energy-efficient appliances or electric vehicles) to highly expensive ones (like carbon capture and storage, or CCS). The goal of emissions trading and carbon pricing, championed by the UK and European financial sectors, was to create a global “carbon market” where emissions could be traded as a financial commodity. London, as a financial hub, wanted to establish a “carbon economy” to generate new financial transactions.
Under the Kyoto Protocol, only developed nations had binding targets. This created an unfair playing field. For a country like Japan, which had already maximized energy efficiency since the oil shocks, reducing further emissions was incredibly expensive—costing up to $487 per ton of CO2. Meanwhile, other countries could reduce emissions much more cheaply. This is why Japan pushed for the Joint Crediting Mechanism (JCM), allowing Japan to earn credits by helping developing nations reduce emissions using Japanese technology. It was a more cost-effective way to combat global warming.
Eventually, the transition to the Paris Agreement abolished the rigid, top-down caps of the Kyoto Protocol in favor of a “pledge and review” system, where each country sets its own targets. This resolved the unfairness of the Kyoto Protocol. However, international negotiations remain highly political. Developing nations continue to demand financial aid from developed nations, while developed nations try to protect their financial interests through market mechanisms.
Ultimately, we must look beyond simple mitigation (reducing emissions) and focus on adaptation. For many developing nations, the immediate priority is not advanced green tech, but basic infrastructure like cement and roads. You cannot build a power plant if the bridges are too weak to transport the equipment. In places like sub-Saharan Africa, a single packet of MSG (Ajinomoto) is a prized luxury because it makes basic, repetitive meals palatable. Understanding the actual living standards and developmental stages of these nations is crucial. Climate policy cannot just be about banning fossil fuels; it must be about realistic adaptation and supporting global development. We will dive deeper into these concepts in the next lecture. Thank you.
