Response to TCFD RecommendationsSustainability
Fundamental Approach
As a global enterprise committed to solving energy problems in Japan and around the world, we consider measures to combat climate change to be a priority issue and have identified the relevant material issues.
In September 2021, we endorsed the TCFD*1 recommendations and joined the TCFD Consortium.*2 To properly evaluate climate change-related risks and opportunities and sustainably enhance our corporate value, we have identified four elements—governance, risk management, strategy, and metrics and targets—in line with the TCFD Recommendations that summarize our climate change-related systems, our business in general, and the initiatives typified by the Three Approaches of JERA Zero CO2 Emissions 2050.
We will continue to disclose information in line with the TCFD recommendations and further enhance communication with investors and other stakeholders.
Governance and Risk Management
Governance
Decisions about important policies, new and updated targets, and other matters pertaining to measures to combat climate change are made by the Board of Directors or the Leadership Panel based on our corporate governance system. We have also established a Sustainability Promotion Committee for the purpose of enhancing environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) management. This cross-divisional committee is chaired by the president and reports directly to the Board of Directors. Its Environmental Subcommittee reports on the plans and results of measures to combat climate change and other environment-related initiatives for each fiscal year
Directors hold active discussions with outside experts and specialist organizations to keep pace with the latest information and findings, which they share with the Leadership Panel and other internal groups. We also host ESG seminars for our employees in addition to providing opportunities for them to have discussions with the directors. We are proactively working to further improve our ESG activities by continuing to expand our directors’ and employees’ understanding of information and trends in climate change and other aspects of ESG management.
Risk Management
We have established a risk management system headed by the president to understand and mitigate risks associated with corporate activities. The system conducts integrated risk management, categorized into operational, market, and credit risks. We identify climate change-related risks in recognition of their potential to impact the different types of risk. Risks to be managed by directors are identified as “significant risks to be managed by management.” The Risk Management Committee (chaired by the president) monitors and reviews the management status and plans for responding to these risks and then reports them to the Board of Directors at scheduled intervals or as needed.
Strategy
Defining the Scope of Analysis
We conduct scenario analysis to identify and analyze risks and opportunities throughout our business value chain. Our analysis covers not only the short term (through 2025), but also the medium term (through 2030) and long term (through 2050).
Under 2°C scenario
Bold policies and technological innovations are implemented to achieve sustainable development, and they successfully limit the increase in average global temperature by the end of this century to 1.5°C–2.0°C from pre-industrial levels.
Reference scenario
IEA: Sustainable Development Scenario (SDS)
IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, Working Group 1:
SSP 1-1.9, SSP 1-2.6
Scenario Configuration
The following two scenarios have been established with reference to the information published by the International Energy Agency and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Over 4°C scenario
Although intended nationally determined contributions under the Paris Agreement and other new national policies are implemented, the average global temperature by the end of this century is at least 4°C higher than pre-industrial levels.
Reference scenario
IEA: Stated Policies Scenario (STEPS)
IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, Working Group 1:
SSP 3-7.0,
Changes in the global energy supply*3
Changes in global climate and sea level*4
Assessment of Impact on our Business
We listed and analyzed climate change-related risks and opportunities for our business based on the scenarios on the previous page.We will work to reduce the risks and seize the opportunities through JERA Zero CO2 Emissions 2050 as well as other efforts and measures.
Assessment of Impact on Our Business: A Deep Dive into the under 2°C Scenario
In light of the steady progress we have made in our business toward achieving JERA Zero CO2 Emissions 2050 since announcing it in October 2020, and due to changes in business circumstances, we formulated a new long-term vision for 2035 and unveiled JERA Environmental Commitment 2035, a set of new environmental targets for achieving the new vision. We updated the JERA Zero CO2 Emissions 2050 Roadmap for JERA Business in Japan based on the new targets, and our updated plan for introducing hydrogen and ammonia combustion in Japan is as shown on p.22.
On this deep dive into scenario analysis in line with the TCFD Recommendations, we analyzed the financial impact on JERA of introducing ammonia to our power generation business, which is driven by technological development, assuming the under 2°C scenario and the aforementioned plan for introducing ammonia in Japan.
Assessment of Cost Advantages of Introducing Ammonia*7
Our analysis revealed potential cost advantages on the order of 50 billion yen per year by 2040and 250 billion yen per year by 2050 compared to the scenario in which we continue using coal.
We will continue to proactively develop large-scale fuel ammonia combustion technology and other decarbonization technologies in addition to devoting energy to ensuring the economic viability of the technologies so that they can help the world move away from carbon as a source of energy.
Metrics and Targets
We view JERA Zero CO2 Emissions 2050 as a long-term goal and have developed a roadmap for achieving it as well as interim targets for CO2 emissions in 2030 and 2035. Additionally, we continue to calculate and assess actual results each year to manage our progress.
- The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) is the task force established by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) at the request of the finance ministers and central bank governors of G20 countries to stabilize the financial system in the face of factors attributable to climate change. The task force has published a framework and recommendations to guide companies’ disclosures pertaining to the risks and opportunities posed by climate change.
- The TCFD Consortium is a forum established for companies and financial institutions that endorse the TCFD Recommendations to hold discussions and work together to ensure effective disclosures by companies and facilitate sound investment decisions by the financial institutions to whom the disclosures are made. To further enhance disclosures in line with the TCFD Recommendations and promote constructive dialogue between investors and companies, the consortium actively publishes guidance on various matters and also hosts TCFD Summits to give companies and financial institutions from around the world opportunities to gather in one place.
- Prepared based on SDS and STEPS from IEA World Energy Outlook 2021
- Prepared based on IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, Working Group 1. All figures compared to presumed pre-industrial levels
- “Extreme” refers to weather events with a probability of occurring once in 10 years.
- * Each risk and opportunity factor is shown here with the method of assessment, the financial factors it impacts, and the financial impact per unit of power generated over the short term (through 2025), medium term (through 2030), and long term (through 2050) expressed as financial impact sensitivity. Financial impact sensitivity for each risk and opportunity is color-coded in three levels (0–5 billion yen/TWh, 5–10 billion yen/TWh, and over 10 billion yen/TWh) as shown in the legend.(1 TWh = 109 kWh)
- All figures calculated based on assumed parameters (e.g., reference scenario). Actual cost effectiveness may differ as business circumstances change. The sizes of the circles on the graph illustrate ammonia amounts. Hydrogen is not included in the scope of this impact assessment. The plan for introducing hydrogen is provided here for reference. JERA_CCB2022_