Clean Coal Day in Japan INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK FOR CLEAN

Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK FOR CLEAN ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT Takahashi Masaki, the World Bank It is my pleasure and honor to have an opportunity to speak on the Clean Coal Day. Today, I would start to brief you a paper “Investment Framework for Clean Energy and Development” that will be proposed to the Development Committee at the World Bank/IMF autumn meeting in Singapore this month. In particular I will report you on how existing financial mechanisms would be extended, and new financial instruments are discussed and proposed. Next, I will introduce World Bank’s coal-fired power plant rehabilitation projects in Turkey, India and China. I will then speak on financing supercritical, ultra-supercritical power plants, environmental control systems, integrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC), and carbon capture and storage (CCS). Outlines of the presentation 1. World Bank Initiatives on Investment Framework for Clean Energy and Development 2. Coal-fired power plant rehabilitation projects in China, India, Turkey etc. 3. Supercritical, Ultra-supercritical plants Ultraand environmental control systems 4. IGCC and CCS The G8 Gleneagles Plan of Action in July 2005 and the Development Committee of the World Bank/ IMF autumn meeting in September 2005 requested the World Bank to work on an” Investment Framework for Clean Energy and Development.” A paper was presented in April 2006 to the World Bank / IMF Development Committee in the spring meeting. Responding to the Development Committee’s comments, an updated paper reviewing existing financial mechanisms and discussing why new mechanisms are necessary and how do they work will be submitted to the autumn meeting in Singapore this month (in September 2006.) K-13 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 1-1. Clean Energy and Development: Background G8 Gleneagles Plan of Action (July 2005) and Development Committee of the World Bank/ IMF (September 2005) requested the World Bank to work on an Investment Framework for Clean Energy and Development A paper was presented in April 2006 to the World Bank / IMF Development Committee. Update paper reviewing existing financial mechanisms and proposing new mechanisms will be submitted to September 2006 meeting. The paper consists of three pillars. The first pillar is access to energy. The investment requirements for access to modern energy can be met by energy sector policy reform to attract private investments and additional public financing. However, special support is required to meet access challenge in Sub-Saharan Africa where access rate is low and no concrete policy reform plan is progressing. The second pillar is low carbon technology promotion to mitigate climate change. Current financial mechanisms have to be extended, but they are not enough to lead to a low carbon economy. Therefore, new financing mechanisms for climate change mitigation are proposed which will be explained later. The third pillar is adaptation to the climate change that has already been happened. Severe weather events and climate variability affect most poor people and poor countries. Risks of weather-related disasters and adapt to changes in climate and weather need to be integrated into poverty and sustainable development strategies. 1-2: Three pillars 1. 2. 3. Investment requirements for access to modern energy can be met by energy sector policy reform to attract private investments and additional public financing. Support required to meet access challenge in Sub-Saharan Africa; SubAfrica; Current financial resources are not enough to lead to a low carbon economy. In addition to extension of economy. existing funds, new financing mechanisms for climate change mitigation are proposed. Severe weather events and climate variability affect most poor people and poor countries. Risks of weather-related disasters and adapt to changes in weatherclimate and weather need to be integrated into poverty and sustainable development strategies. K-14 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 Financing requirements to complete the three pillars are as follows: Electricity supply in developing countries requires $165 billion/year through 2010 half of which readily identified. To achieve 100% electrification by 2030 requires $34 billion/year.. Financing gap can be filled by policy reform except in Sub-Saharan Africa. Deployment of Low Carbon Technologies requires $30 billion/year incremental cost required beyond the basic need for electricity generation. Adaptation requires $20 – 40 billion/year subject to climate risk. 1-3: Financing Requirements • Pillar 1. Access: $165 billion/year for electricity • • supply through 2010 half of which readily identified. $34 billion/year for access. Financing gap to be filled by policy reform. Pillar 2. Low Carbon Technologies: $30 billion/year incremental cost required beyond the basic need for electricity generation. Pillar 3. Adaptation: $20 – 40 billion/year is subject to climate risk Let’s concentrate in pillar 2 and look how much financing available now by existing financing mechanisms keeping in mind that the incremental cost of $30billion/year is required to achieve the goal. Global Environment Facility (GEF) is the largest source of grant financing for low carbon technologies such as energy efficiency and renewable energy. However, it provided only $100 million/year during the last four years mainly for removing barriers of deployment technologies in developing countries which are commercially available in developed countries. GEF did not provide much grant for the long-term low costs low carbon technologies. Only one hundredth of available fund to the requirements cannot make many differences. Scaling up at least 10 times is required to meaningful amount of financing IGCC, fuel cells and rehabilitation of existing plants Carbon finance can contribute to financing a transition to a low-carbon economy, but the carbon market is currently limited primarily due to regulatory risks since no rules have been established beyond 2012. A voluntary carbon market is also highly uncertain before the establishment of the rule and it will only take low-priced options. Consequently we propose new financing tools: Clean Energy Financing Vehicle (CEFV) and Clean Energy Support Fund (CESF) to compensate existing mechanisms and provide enough financing for the requirements. K-15 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 1-4: Climate Mitigation and Low Carbon Technology Deployment 1. GEF is the largest source of grant financing for energy efficiency and renewable energy - $100 million/year during the last four years - Mainly for removing barriers - Long-term low costs low carbon technologies not Longenough -Scale up at least 10 times required to meaningful amount of financing IGCC, fuel cells and rehabilitation of existing plants 2. Carbon finance can contribute to financing a transition to a low-carbon economy, but the lowcarbon market is currently limited primarily due to regulatory risks. 3. Voluntary carbon market is highly uncertain and only for low-priced options. low4. New Financing Tools (CEFV and CESF) are CESF) proposed Clean Energy Financing Vehicle (CEFV) provides low interest and long term soft loan to buy down the incremental cost of low carbon technology (such as IGCC compared to the conventional pulverized coal plant) projects. CEFV could also provide technical assistance, on a grant basis, to support the piloting of high risk, pre-commercial technologies and help deploying such a technology. Implementing agencies of the projects would pledge carbon credits created by the projects to CEFV in return of getting benefits of soft loan. CEFV sells the carbon credits on the market to get itself continue providing soft loan sustainable. The proposed CEFV would be financially sustainable at an average price of about $15/ton of CO2 (in constant 2006 dollars.) Based on current estimates and market absorption capacities, it is proposed that the CEFV’s initial equity from developed countries be sized at $10 billion to support average annual disbursement of $2 billion. The investment made by the shareholders would be expected to earn a reasonable rate of return. 1-5: CEFV Structure and Funding Mechanism K-16 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 Clean Energy Support Fund (CEFV) will provide grant in proportion to the carbon credits created by projects. The projects will be competitively selected with the price of carbon by the project, and the maximum subsidies would be calculated by an administratively determined “shadow price.” As in the case of CEFV, carbon credits created by the projects will be pledged to CESF, and CESF would sell them to the market enabling itself continue providing grant sustainably. The CESF will take the market price risk of carbon credits as well as the risks associated with regulatory risks associated beyond 2012. The CESF would provide incentives to the project implementing agencies to select low carbon technologies, and also stabilize the price of carbon by taking the carbon credits from the projects until the rules of the market be established. Both CEFV and CEFS are still in a preliminary stage of concept creation. We will improve the idea by the comments from all stakeholders including donors, implementing agencies of developing couriers, technology suppliers, and participants to the carbon market. I would welcome and appreciate your comments on these new mechanisms considering applications of the instruments to clean coal projects. 1-6: CESF Structure and Funding Mechanism So far, I have talked on “Clean Energy and Development” paper, but now I’m switching a gear to on going and future clean coal projects in the World Bank. And I will give you my perspective on how existing and new financing mechanisms proposed in the paper would be applied to develop and enhance clean coal projects. New power plant project is more appropriate to apply advanced power generating technologies. However, it takes time from planning to complete construction and commissioning the plant. Rehabilitation of existing plants can be quickly and effectively and implemented to respond power capacity and generation demand increase while reducing carbon emissions. On the hand, rehabilitation projects are very site specific depending on the size, operating years, and operation and maintenance practices. To improve reliability, availability, power output and efficiency, replacement and repair of components of the plants need to be studied and judged differently at each project. Since existing power plant has already infrastructure including coal handling and storage, ash treatment system, cooling water system, water supply system, waste K-17 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 water treatment system and transmission lines, usually it has lower investment cost per incremental power capacity and per incremental power generation to rehabilitate existing plants than to build new plants. However, in some cases scrapping existing plants and building new plants are more economical. I have been riding a fifteen years old bicycle, but I had to replace front and rear wheels, gears, crank shaft ad breaks in last couple of years. I could have bought a new bike with the cost of all parts together. In case of power plant, you have to judge whether you would rehabilitate or scrap the plant considering remaining life, increase of operation and maintenance cost, and increase of fuel cost, and comparing with new plant construction. In case of countries like China and India where the power demand increases rapidly, there is no choice but they have to continue operating the plant and cannot stop for rehabilitation.. Consequently, the old and degraded efficiency plant had to be operated as it was without rehabilitation last couple of years. In this case, support to financing back up generation during the rehabilitation period would be required. Rehabilitation in many cases include investment in environmental control equipment such as retrofitting flue gas desulphurization (FGD) facility or improving electrostatic precipitator (ESP). Who pays the cost of the environmental control equipment may be an issue in the rehabilitation. Last but not least, plant reliability, efficiency or power output may be degraded quickly and return to the status before the rehabilitation, if operation and maintenance practice is not improved. A training to improve operation and maintenance practice would be necessary in that case. The power plant management, operation and maintenance could be contracted and outsourced. 2-1. Coal-fired power plant rehabilitation projects • Provide low carbon options with quick • • • • • implementation Site specific: unit size, operating years, O&M practices etc. System wide least cost planning, energy audit and performance test, identifying scope of rehabilitation Back up generation in rapid growth demand Environmental control systems improvement: who pays the cost? O&M improvement and Monitoring/Evaluation In Turkey, Afsin-Elbistan Power Plant has started operation of four of 340 MW lignite-fired units between 1985 and 1987. However, from the start of the plant operation, there are several problems such as instability of lignite quality, design inflexibility of combustion systems which could not respond to the fuel quality change, and mul-practice of operation and maintenance made the power plant output decreased down to 260MWnet, and plant efficiency has degraded to 27% from the design plant efficiency of 36.6%, and together with low system demand plant capacity factor has been lower than 40%. After the rehabilitation, each units should be able to operate at 300MWnet, with efficiency of 31% and the plant capacity at 75% or above. K-18 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 In 2004 Chubu Electric Company in Japan diagnosed the power plant, analyzed the causes of degradation of performance, identified the components to be repaired and replaced, and estimated the cost of rehabilitation. Based on the results, RWE in Germany made a more detailed feasibility study. Now EUAS, plant owner is selecting contractor of the rehabilitation. The rehabilitation work should be completed in 2009. The total project cost is estimated to be 380 million Euro, and the World Bank is providing 280 million Euro including the Technical Assistance of 1.7 million Euro for operation and maintenance practice improvement. Since JICA is providing training of operation and maintenance of thermal power plants in Turkey, we would like to cooperate in this area. 2-2 Lignite power (340MW x 4) rehabilitation projects in Turkey • Total Project Cost: 380M Euro (280M Euro IBRD Loan) Power 260MWnet to 300MWnet Capacity Factor: from 40% to 75% Efficiency: 27% to 31% TA for O&M improvement • • • • (photo by RWE) The World Bank and GEF approved this August to appraise the Indian coal-fired power plant rehabilitation project. A preparation mission starts this month and as a team member I will be joining the missions and will leave for Delhi tomorrow. The World Bank provides INRD loan of the $120 million, and the GEF provides grand of $45 million for the project. The financing will cover the rehabilitation of either 110 MW or 210 MW unites owned by State Electricity Boards (SEBs) and the energy efficiency improvement measures are of particular interest of the project. The SEBs’ have seriously bad financial conditions due to low electricity tariff level, low collection rate, electricity theft etc., and they don’t have enough fund to rehabilitate their plants. In addition, a rapid increase of electricity demand in last couple of years prevented the plants with deteriorated efficiency from stopping operation, and the plants have been kept on running as it is. The project will finance the plants with total capacity of 640 MW. A part of the GEF grant: around $7 million will be used for the technical assistance to help power plants which are not included in the project build capacity of energy efficiency improvement of the plant through rehabilitation and expect to replicate the project in total of 3,300 MW plants which require rehabilitation. However, if further soft loan is necessary, CEFV/CESF may be used to rehabilitate remaining plants. K-19 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 2-3: Coal-fired power plant rehabilitation project in India • US$120 million IBRD loan + US$45 million GEF grant • 15% counter-part funding to be arranged by utility counter• GEF Grants of USD 7 million for Technical Assistance support - also available to plants opting for EE R&M not funded by Bank • Financing window for demonstrating EE R&M approaches in about 640 MW of coal power plants – 110MW and 210MW units to be selected due to high replication potential (financing available in July- September 2007) July- • Technical assistance window to support barrier mitigation in demonstration projects and to aid replication of EE R&M in subsequent projects – TA to enable replication in about 3300 MW of remaining similar capacity Many small size coal-fired power plants with less than 100MW are still operating in Chine. The government decided to close down these small size plants. On the contrary, to increase capacity rapidly, small size power plants which required only provincial level approve and quick to build have been newly built. Therefore, an average coal-fired power plant efficiency is around 34% (the coal consumption rate to generate one kilowatt hour: 367 gce/kWh) compared to the OECD’s average of 41% (300 gce/kWh). 2-4: Coal-fired power plant coal consumption rate in China in 2004 Unit Number of sets Average Gross Coal Consumption Rate (gce/kWh) 328 340 355 365 > 390 ~ 367 ± 600 MW ± 300 MW 53 341 218 389 > 4000 200 - 300 MW 100 - 200 MW below 100 MW Overall Efficiency China first needs to close down small power plants with less than 100MW as the government policy. Next couple of years including this year is estimated to have power supply surplus, and it will be a very good opportunity to implement the policy of closing down the small plants. A part of GEF’s grant of 20 million will be used to help promote the policy of small power plant shut down. K-20 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 Rehabilitation demonstration projects including energy efficiency will be done in the selected two provinces. Around ten different types of power stations will be selected in a competition, and expected the similar rehabilitation projects will be replicated in other provinces in China. If necessary, CEFV/CES would be used to replicate the project. A technical assistance of the project will help reduce the cost of rehabilitation and disseminate knowledge of the rehabilitation. 2-5: Thermal power efficiency project in China (GEF $20M) • Phase-out small size plant Phase• Efficiency Improvement Demonstration Project Identify about 10 sets of potential units in different categories of unit size – Technical auditing and justification (economic, financial, reliability) – Development of new business and financing models for rehabilitation • – about 57 units of 200MW and 57 units of 300 MW have similar type of technologies/design Technical Capacity building – TA to technology development and/or transfer to lower down cost of rehabilitation and to explore further efficiency increase increase potential – Creation of awareness and dissemination of knowledge Supercritical (SC) technology is an advanced high efficiency power generating technology applied for many years in commercial plants in Japan, Europe and the US. The super-critical technology has been further evolved to the Ultra-super critical (USC) technology. Both SC and USC technologies are the most readily available technologies to increase power plant efficiency, and thus reduce CO2 emissions. In June, I visited five major power generation companies and survived the applications of the SC and USC technologies. All power generating companies are aggressively applying the SC and UNS technologies. More than 100 units of SC or USC 600MW and 1000MW units are under construction or have been ordered. Among the nearly 50 units are applying USC technologies. Therefore, in China the SC and USC technologies will be deployed at commercial basis without the support of CEFV/CESF. Indian government is announced Ultra Mega project that will build many 800 MW or 1000MW SC units. If the project is on going as scheduled, there will be no need of further assistance, either. Regarding Environmental Control Systems, the Bank is appraising a Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) project in Shandong province in China. If a regional SO2 emissions credit market is established, the credit will give incentive to install FGD. However, the command control will be the primary measure in China to install FGD and Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR.). There are however a problem pointed out that even after installing the environmental control equipment, the plant owner often stop the equipment to save operating cost. Monitoring and enforcement measures have to be strengthened, in this situation, but the market based mechanism to give incentive to plant operator operate the environmental control equipment would also be an effective way. EU accession countries such as Romania and Bulgaria need to comply with EU directives, and rehabilitation projects include FGD retrofit. Last year Romanian government asked to help them K-21 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 to find out technical and economic feasibility of rehabilitation and FGD retrofit projects as a clean energy program. We discussed with JBIC an idea of greening hot air by retrofitting FGD to the plant. However, the governmental staffs have been renewed and the projects have been suspended. We hope the program will start soon again. Kosovo has an abundant resource of lignite, but the power plants are old and unreliable. They have to apply rationing, and power supply frequently disrupted in daily life. Kosovo B plant is under rehabilitation with support from EU, but Kosovo A plant is not worth putting large fund for rehabilitation. Rather the plant should be maintained with small fund until a new power plant completed. A new power plant should not be able to supply domestic power demand, but also to expert electricity to neighboring countries to be a driving force of the new nation. However, Kosovo is not a country yet, and regulations have not been established, therefore private industries are not willing to investment in Kosovo. The World Bank is helping Kosovo to develop legal and regularity system, setting up concessional right for the lignite use, and the private fund would be used efficiently and transparently to build power plants and develop lignite mines. A Coal Bed Methane (CBM) and Coal Mine Methane (CMM) recovery and utilization project has been financed by a carbon fund. More CBM and CMM projects are expected to be financed by the carbon fund. 3. Supercritical, Ultra-supercritical plants, environmental control systems and coal mine methane • Supercritical and Ultra-supercritical technologies • IBRD loan for FGD projects in China and ECA • countries Carbon Finance CMM projects in China – China is already applying these technologies (more than 100 super and around 50 ultra-super plants ultraunder construction or ordered – India may need some push if Ultra Mega project does not fly Last topic today is the IGCC. The IGCC is expected to achieve near zero CO2 emissions with the combination of CCS. After this session, we will hear about FutureGen project in the US and GreenGen project in China. Bothe projects will demonstrate the near zero emissions concept, and we hope the projects are going as scheduled. In Norway, Canada, Algeria, Australia and Japan CCS projects are progressing. In particular, carbon storage is country and site specific depending on geographical uniqueness of the country. Therefore, China and India would also need to start the demonstration project of carbon storage some time soon. The IGCC, however, has a high capital cost: around 40 – 50% higher supercritical plant. Also it has a risk as a new technology. Chinese government asked the World Bank/GEF to support the Yantai 400MW IGCC project in 2003 by providing grant of $15 million. As a first step of appraisal of the project, studies funded by Project Development Fund (PDF) have been done to analyze the carbon capture and storage and hydrogen production alternatives at the IGCC plant. A workshop was held in Beijing in June to disseminate the results of the study, and the final reports of the studies have been completed in August. K-22 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 Beside Yantai and GreenGen projects, all five major Chinese power generation companies have their own plan for the IGCC projects with either 250MW or 400MW units and are proposing to the government. Coal companies are also eager to introduce IGCC technology. In Shandong province a multi-production IGCC project producing 240,000 ton/year methanol and 60 MW has been constructed, and started operation in April this year. A larger project has been proposed in Shanghai by another coal company as well. GEF grant will be sued to reduce cost of IGCC by optimizing design, localizing manufacturing capacity, transferring state-of-the-art technology, and helping the government to develop zero emission strategies. We are keeping dialogue with the Chinese government how we could effectively use the fund. To demonstrate 400MW class IGCC and to combine with the CCS technology later will require a long term and large size incremental cost. However, since the combination with CCS would reduce significant amount of CO2 emissions, this combination of technologies and projects would be a good example of applying CEFV/CESF/ 4. IGCC and CCS projects • Zero CO2 emissions with carbon capture and storage • • • (CCS), combined with IGCC, but with high costs and high risks 400 MW IGCC in Yantai, Shandong province, China Yantai, Total project cost around $420-520 million $420GEF supports – Incremental cost of design changes • Equip the plant for future hydrogen production and CO2 capture • GreenGen project (Huaneng and 7 participants) (Huaneng • CPI, Datang, Huadian and Guodian plan IGCC projects Datang, • Potential for CEFVCESF applications – Capacity building – Technology improvement to reduce cost – Development of zero CO2 emission strategy “Investment Framework for Clean Energy and Development” paper proposes extension of existing mechanisms such as GEF and carbon finance. It also propose to create new financing mechanisms of CEFV or CESF. We would like to improve these mechanisms with your comments to be most applicable to clean coal projects. Rehabilitation projects can be implemented quickly using GEF and carbon finance. In a longer term and larger scale, CEFV or CESF would be applicable. Supercritical and Ultra-supercritical technologies will be applied by the conventional private or public financing. However, if it is necessary, CEFV/CESF could accelerate the deployment of these technologies. Environmental Control Systems project would be financed by conventional loan with potential help of potential regional emission credits. Coal Bed Methane projects can be supported by carbon finance. IGCC and CCS projects have high cost and high risk. But the combination of the technologies are necessary to achieve the goal of zero emissions while keep using coal. IGCC and CCS projects would be good examples for CEFV/CESF to demonstrate buy down high cost and mitigate high risks I would like to conclude my presentation by hoping clean coal projects further accelerated by the new financing mechanisms, and congratulating Clean Coal Day. Thank you. K-23 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 Conclusions • Clean Energy and Development paper proposes • • • • extension of existing financial tools and new instruments: CEFV/CESF to buy down costs and mitigate risks of low carbon technologies Rehabilitation projects can be implemented quickly in supply surplus windows initially using combination of GEF, carbon financing and more extensively funded by CEFV/CESF Supercritical, USC plants can be financed by conventional private and public financing. CEFV/CESF may accelerate demonstration when required. Environmental Control Systems by conventional loan with regional emissions credits, and CMM projects by carbon finance IGCC and CCS projects would be good examples for CEFV/CESF to demonstrate buy down high cost and mitigate high risks K-24 Clean Coal Day in Japan 2006 氏名：高橋正貴 略歴 世界銀行上級電力エンジニア クリーンコール技術の開発と適応の分野で 25 年間以上従事。現 在、世銀の「クリーンエネルギーと開発への投資枠組み」論文に 技術的基礎および発電技術のコストについてのアドバイスを行っている。小規模から大規模にわたる 電化技術のアセスメントを完成し出版予定。中国のクリーンコール技術アセスメントと政府への助言 を行ってきた。中国の IGCC プロジェクトに関連して炭酸ガス回収貯蔵技術と水素製造技術の研究の責 任者でもある。トルコ、中国、インドで石炭火力のリハビリテーションプロジェクトで技術上の責任 を担っている。コソボでは新規リグナイト火力の技術支援プロジェクト、エジプトではガス火力発電 所建設プロジェクトに参加している。 高橋はそのほかにも、タイ、ベトナム、ポーランド、チェコ、ロシア、ウクライナ、ブラジルでクリ ーンコール、炭素ファイナンス、バイオマスのプロジェクト等に従事してきた。 1996 年に世界銀行に移る以前は、電源開発（現在 J-パワー電源開発）に 16 年間勤め、高効率化技術、 環境保護技術の研究開発、国際エネルギー機関（IEA）の石炭諮問委員会（CIAB）アソシエートメン バーなどに従事。また、米国電力研究所（EPRI）で高性能石炭火力発電プロジェクトに従事、マサチ ューセッツ工科大学（MIT）では地球温暖化の科学、経済、政策を学んだ。大学院は東京工業大学でエ ネルギー修士課程を専攻、大学は東京大学基礎科学課で基礎および応用科学を学んだ。 Senior Power Engineer The World Bank Mr. Takahashi has been working on clean coal technology development and applications for more than 25 years. He is providing technical basis, power generation cost input and advice to the “Investment Framework for Clean Energy and Development” paper. He directed and managed technology assessment of grid, mini-grid and off-grid electrification. He lead technology assessment of CCT and policy advice on deployment of CCT to the Chinese government. He is managing technical studies of CO2 capture and storage and hydrogen production at the IGCC project in China. He is engaged in coal-fired rehabilitation project in Turkey, India and China, and new lignite investment technical assistance project in Kosovo. He is also engaged in gas-fired steam and combined cycle project in Egypt. Mr. Takahashi has also worked for projects in other countries including Thailand, Vietnam, Romania, Poland, Czech Republic, Russia and Ukraine and Brazil for clean coal, carbon finance, and biomass projects. He joined the World Bank in 1996.Before joining the World Bank, he worked with Electric Power Development Company(now J-Power) in Japan for 16 years and engaged in power plant efficiency improvement, environmental control, and coal and power policy as an IEA’s Coal Industry Advisory Board associated member. He worked on the Improve Coal-fired Power Plant project at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) in the US. He studied climate change science, economy and policies at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the US. He has MS in energy science Tokyo Institute of Technology, and got BS pure and applied science in University of Tokyo. K-25