Study on the Possibility of Promoting Quantitative Evaluation Indicators for Strengthening Energy Resilience in the East Asia Region

Table of Contents

• Table of Contents 6
• List of Figures 7
• Chapter 1 16
• Introduction 16
• 1. APEC Energy Resiliency Principle 20
• 1.1. Introduction 20
• 1.2. Background and Purpose of the APEC Energy Resiliency Principle 21
• 1.2.1. International efforts against natural disasters 21
• 1.2.2. APEC energy resiliency principle 21
• 1.2.3. Definition of energy resiliency 22
• 1.2.4. The principle on the role of financial institutions and energy resiliency indicators 24
• 1.2.5. Importance of multi-stakeholder knowledge sharing 25
• 2. APEC’s Future Perspectives of Energy Resiliency Enhancement 25
• 2.1. APEC Will Expand Its Activities to Enhance Energy Resiliency in the APEC Region 25
• 2.2. APEC Energy Resiliency Guidelines10F 27
• 2.2.1. Introduction 27
• 2.2.2. Scope of the guidelines 27
• 2.2.3. Future action 28
• 2.2.4. Energy resiliency enhancement project in 2023 29
• 2.3. Development of ISO 22366: Security and Resilience – Energy Resilience – Framework and Principles13F 29
• Chapter 3 33
• Review of Consideration for Building Indicators Relating Energy Resilience Enhancement 33
• 1. Overview 33
• 2. RAND Corporation’s Study17F 34
• 3. Argonne National Laboratory’s Study19F 35
• 4. Sandia National Laboratory’s Study20F 38
• 5. Consideration for Development of ERS in Asian Countries 41
• 5.1. Philippines 41
• 5.2. Thailand 43
• 5.3. Indonesia 46
• Chapter 4 48
• Prototype of a Quantitative Energy Resilience Scoring Tool and the Trial Results 48
• 1. The Need for Improved Trial Energy Resilience Scoring 48
• 2. Detail of the Prototype of the Energy Resilience Score System 49
• 2.1. Concept of an Energy Resilience Score (ERS) 49
• 2.2. Overview of the ERS 51
• 2.3. Approach to calculating the ERS 52
• 2.4. Detailed Explanation of the Three Evaluations 54
• 2.4.1. General 54
• 2.4.2. Region 54
• 2.4.3. Energy supplier 55
• 2.4.4. Energy consumers 55
• 3. Trial Analysis with Prototype ERS system 56
• 3.1. Target Consumer (Facility) 56
• 3.2. Current Status of Disaster Risk in the Assessed Areas 59
• 3.3. Survey of the Supply Side 63
• 3.4. Survey of the Consumer Side 69
• 3.5. Results of the Evaluation 71
• Chapter 5 75
• Discussions at the Workshops 75
• 1. General 75
• 2. Current Status of Disaster Risk in the Three Countries 75
• 2.1. Japan 75
• 2.2. Thailand 76
• 2.3. Indonesia 77
• 3. Major Discussions at the Workshop Meetings 78
• 3.1. Workshop in Japan 78
• 3.2. Workshop in Thailand 81
• 3.3. Workshop in Indonesia 83
• Chapter 6 89
• Challenges to be Addressed 89
• 1. General 89
• 2. Refinement of Scoring 89
• 3. Fine-tuning According to Countries and Regions 89
• 3.1. Regional Scores (Climate Scores) 89
• 3.2. Regional Scores (Future Perspective) 90
• 4. Potential for Utilisation in the Private Sector 90
• Chapter 7 91
• Expected Future Work Regarding the ERS 91
• 1. Expectations for the ERS 91
• 2. Expected Future Work Related to the ERS System 92
• 2.1. Improving the Usability of the ERS Evaluation System 92
• 2.2. Promote Collaboration of Data Collection for ERS Evaluation 94
• 2.3. Accumulation of scoring data 94
• 2.4. Standardisation of Reliable and Comparable Data 95
• Appendix 1 97
• Contents of the APEC Energy Resiliency Principle and Guidance30F 97
• Appendix 2 103
• Workshop Agenda 103
• Appendix 3 109
• Workshop Participants List 109
• Appendix 4 115
• Presentation Material at the Workshops 115