Japan, Energy Intensity and the Kyoto Protocol

As part of my ongoing posts on Japan (here) I came across an interesting statistic in a paper by Clive Hamilton and Hal Turton on Determinants of emissions growth in OECD countries. Over time, the OECD and EU countries have been reducing their energy intensity (TFC/GDP) where TFC is Total Final Consumption of energy and GDP is Gross Domestic Product. Japan has not reduced energy intensity to the same degree (see the graphic above). From the Hamilton and Turton paper:

"Japan has not improved as much as other countries, a result that can be attributed to a combination of events prior to 1982 including economic restructuring that replaced highly energy-intensive industries and pressures from the 1970s oil crisis that led to a highly energy-efficient economy".

Why is Japan as an energy intensity outlier interesting or important? Consider a simple model that underlies a lot of thinking about environmental impacts (e.g., the IPAT equation, the Kaya Identity and the Environmental Kuznets Curve):

Population growth (N above and P in the IPAT equation) under a given level of affluence (A in the IPAT equation and q above) generates output (Q). A given level of technology (T in the IPAT equation and e above) generates a certain level of energy use (E), that is, energy intensity. Energy intensity generates an environmental impact (C for CO2 emissions in this case). The lower the energy intensity, the less the environmental impact.

The fact that Japan has had relatively stable energy intensity for much of the late 20th century and, as a result of the 2011 earthquake and tsunami, might have to phase out its nuclear power plants means that, in the future, we can expect an increase in carbon emissions (one estimate, here, is for a 10% to 37% increase). Japan had planned on using increased nuclear power to reduce CO2 emissions and meet its commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. As a result of the earthquake and tsunami, Japan is unlikely to meet its emission targets.