5 THE POLITICS OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT RESTARTS …
113
In the end, this suspension served to modestly worsen grid access
conditions for solar generators, albeit with significant regional variation. 14
METI did not oppose the suspensions and formulated modifications to
the grid connection rules for new grid connections that went into effect in
early 2015. The preexisting rules allowing EPCOs to implement uncompensated grid curtailment up to 30 days a year for PV generators with
over 500 KW of capacity were expanded to include facilities between 10
and 500 KW of capacity, with permissible cut off times shortened from a
per day to a per hour basis, but only up to 360 hours per year (or 15 days)
before the EPCOs must compensate generators. However, specially designated EPCOs were given the right to unlimited curtailment of new
generation capacity without compensation if their grid networks become
overwhelmed by an influx of variable renewable electricity exceeding
their capacity. METI designated the same five EPCOs that had originally
suspended grid connection applications: Hokkaido, Tohoku, Shikoku,
Kyushu, and Okinawa, plus Hokuriku and Chugoku. However, notably,
the largest EPCOs, TEPCO, KEPCO, and Chubu EPCO (covering the
Nagoya region) were not included and hence continued to operate under
relatively favorable connection rules for renewable energy generators.
Overall qualifications for applying for grid connection were also tightened. Nonetheless, these new conditions were not especially onerous and
resolved the suspension of applications by the five EPCOs, suggesting a
basic continuity of policy (Publicover 2016).
METI’s Storage Subsidy Response
to Growing Curtailment Risks
There is reason to suspect that the EPCOs’ vested interests in the form of
sunk costs in nuclear power and even fossil fuel generating facilities, and a
more general desire to stifle competing generators, have been underlying
motivations in pressing to limit grid connections by solar PV and other
renewable energy producers, to underinvest in grid improvements needed
to accommodate more renewable energy, and to prefer restarting their
nuclear powers plant and curtailing solar PV supply to the grid rather than
relying more on renewable energy. Nonetheless, while this book’s vestedinterest hypothesis may thus offer a good explanation for the behavior
of the EPCOs, it does not offer a good explanation of METI’s behavior,
or that of the OCCTO, both of which have been pursuing policies that
expand grid capacity to connect more renewable energy and setting and
113
In the end, this suspension served to modestly worsen grid access
conditions for solar generators, albeit with significant regional variation. 14
METI did not oppose the suspensions and formulated modifications to
the grid connection rules for new grid connections that went into effect in
early 2015. The preexisting rules allowing EPCOs to implement uncompensated grid curtailment up to 30 days a year for PV generators with
over 500 KW of capacity were expanded to include facilities between 10
and 500 KW of capacity, with permissible cut off times shortened from a
per day to a per hour basis, but only up to 360 hours per year (or 15 days)
before the EPCOs must compensate generators. However, specially designated EPCOs were given the right to unlimited curtailment of new
generation capacity without compensation if their grid networks become
overwhelmed by an influx of variable renewable electricity exceeding
their capacity. METI designated the same five EPCOs that had originally
suspended grid connection applications: Hokkaido, Tohoku, Shikoku,
Kyushu, and Okinawa, plus Hokuriku and Chugoku. However, notably,
the largest EPCOs, TEPCO, KEPCO, and Chubu EPCO (covering the
Nagoya region) were not included and hence continued to operate under
relatively favorable connection rules for renewable energy generators.
Overall qualifications for applying for grid connection were also tightened. Nonetheless, these new conditions were not especially onerous and
resolved the suspension of applications by the five EPCOs, suggesting a
basic continuity of policy (Publicover 2016).
METI’s Storage Subsidy Response
to Growing Curtailment Risks
There is reason to suspect that the EPCOs’ vested interests in the form of
sunk costs in nuclear power and even fossil fuel generating facilities, and a
more general desire to stifle competing generators, have been underlying
motivations in pressing to limit grid connections by solar PV and other
renewable energy producers, to underinvest in grid improvements needed
to accommodate more renewable energy, and to prefer restarting their
nuclear powers plant and curtailing solar PV supply to the grid rather than
relying more on renewable energy. Nonetheless, while this book’s vestedinterest hypothesis may thus offer a good explanation for the behavior
of the EPCOs, it does not offer a good explanation of METI’s behavior,
or that of the OCCTO, both of which have been pursuing policies that
expand grid capacity to connect more renewable energy and setting and