With All Deliberate Speed: Electricity Restructuring in Asia fileWith All Deliberate Speed: ......

PROGRAM ON ENERGY, THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE ECONOMY

15th Pacific Rim WorkshopNovember 9–10, 1999

Keiichi Yokobori, ChairmanLoren Cox, Moderator and RapporteurJohn A. Riggs, Program Executive Director

With All Deliberate Speed:Electricity Restructuring in Asia

Pacific Rim book 3/17/00 4:47 PM Page A

For additional copies of this paper, please contact:

The Aspen InstitutePublications Office109 Houghton Lab LaneP.O. Box 222Queenstown, MD 21658Phone: (410) 820-5338Fax: (410) 827-9174E-mail: [email protected]: www.aspeninstitute.org

For all other inquiries, please contact:

The Aspen InstituteProgram on Energy, the Environment, and the EconomyOne Dupont Circle, NWSuite 700Washington, DC 20036-1193Phone: (202) 736-5823Fax: (202) 467-0790

Copyright © 2000 by The Aspen Institute

The Aspen InstituteOne Dupont Circle, NWSuite 700Washington, DC 20036-1193

Published in the United States of America in 1999by The Aspen Institute

All rights reserved

Printed in the United States of America

00-002ISBN: 0-898-43-278-2

Pacific Rim book 3/17/00 4:47 PM Page B

Table of Contents

I. Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

II. Agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

III. Moderator’s Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

IV. Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

V. The Aspen Institute Program on Energy, the Environment, and the Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Pacific Rim book 3/17/00 4:47 PM Page C

Pacific Rim book 3/17/00 4:47 PM Page D

Foreword

Since 1983 the Aspen Institute has periodically convened a PacificRim Energy Workshop to discuss energy fuels trade and other topi-cal issues. In November 1999 the 15th Workshop was held in TheShonan Village Center, Kanagawa, Japan, hosted and co-sponsoredby the Asia Pacific Energy Research Centre (APERC).

The principal theme of the Workshop was electricity restruc-turing. The agenda was divided into three parts: a discussion ofthe modernization and restructuring of the electricity industry; areview of recent developments in fuels trade; and a review of theplans for or developments in electricity restructuring and otherenergy issues in each of the countries or economies represented atthe meeting.

As with all Aspen Institute policy programs, the objective ofthe Workshop is to improve the quality of leadership and policyformulation. To achieve this goal, a group of energy experts,diverse in nationality, employment, and academic training, dis-cuss and analyze energy problems and solutions in a casual andcollegial atmosphere that fosters the free exchange of informa-tion and opinions. Unlike a typical conference in which expertsdeliver their wisdom to an audience from the podium, the exper-tise at these Workshops is distributed around the table, and allparticipants contribute their knowledge and perspective to theothers.

Pacific Rim book 3/17/00 4:47 PM Page 1

To encourage free and open discussion, the Workshop is con-ducted under a not-for-attribution rule that assures participantsthat they will not be quoted by name without their explicit permis-sion. In addition, the Workshop does not seek to arrive at specificconclusions or policy recommendations. The Moderator’s reportthat follows thus represents only his attempt to capture the majorpoints of the discussion.

The 1999 Workshop was ably chaired by Mr. Keiichi Yokobori,President of APERC, an energy expert with long international expe-rience. His graciousness and good judgment in helping to plan themeeting and to identify participants were largely responsible for itssuccess. The APERC staff ensured that the preparations and logisticsfor the meeting were smooth and painless, and the Aspen Institute isgrateful to both president and staff.

The Workshop was skillfully moderated, as in previous years, by Mr.Loren Cox, Associate Director of the Center for Energy &Environmental Policy Research and the Program on the Science &Policy of Global Change at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.His broad knowledge of energy markets in Asia, based on consulting togovernments and companies in the region for over 20 years, allowedhim to focus the discussion on important points and to elicit relevantinformation from the wide variety of participants.

The Aspen Institute also gratefully acknowledges the financialsupport of Unocal Corporation and A.T. Kearney Inc., who gener-ously contributed to the Institute’s administrative costs associatedwith the meeting. Without their support, the Workshop could nothave taken place.

John A. RiggsExecutive DirectorProgram on Energy, the Environment,

and the Economy

WITH ALL DELIBERATE SPEED: ELECTRICITY RESTRUCTURING IN ASIA

2


Agenda

Monday, November 8Opening reception and dinner

Tuesday, November 9Welcome and Introduction

Session I: Electricity Restructuring

North America / OceaniaGerald Klenner, McKinsey & Company, USAHoff Stauffer, A.T. Kearney, USA

East AsiaIchiro Maeda, TEPCO, JapanHyun-Joon Chang, Korea Energy EconomicsInstitute

Southeast AsiaPio J. Benavidez, NPC, PhilippinesLuluk Sumiarso, Ministry of Mines and Energy,IndonesiaMohd Annas Haji Mohd Nor, Department ofElectricity and Gas Supply, Malaysia



4

ChinaHao Weiping, SDPC, ChinaBarrie Leay, Ecodyne Ltd., New Zealand

Session II: Energy Trade & Infrastructure

Oil TradeTilaklal Doshi, Unocal, Singapore

Gas Trade (including infrastructure)Hoesung Lee, Council on Energy andEnvironment Korea (CEEK), KoreaShigeru Muraki, Tokyo Gas, Japan

CoalIan Coddington, Coddington International,Australia

Electricity GridIra H. Jolles, GPU, USAKoomchoak Biyaem, EGAT, Thailand

Session III: Review of Economies

Australia Roger StuartCanada Phil PrinceChina Wu Zongxin

Wednesday, 10 November 1999

Session III: Review of Economies (continued)

Indonesia Luluk SumiarsoKorea Hyu-Joon ChangMalaysia Mohd Annas Haji Mohd NorMexico Juan EibenschutzNew Zealand Barrie Leay


Papua New Guinea Martin BonouPhilippines Pio J. BenavidezChinese Taipei Jing-sheng SuThailand Koomchoak BiyaemUSA David JhiradJapan Toshio Inoue

General Discussion and Conclusion

Moderator’s summary remarks: Loren C. Cox

General Discussion

Chairman’s concluding remarks: Keiichi Yokobori

PACIFIC RIM ENERGY WORKSHOP

5


Moderator’s Summary

Electricity Restructuring

The theoretical and observed benefits of electricity deregula-tion are quite powerful. Where undertaken they seem to reflect theeconomic gains which have been found in the deregulation ofother sectors such as airlines, trucking and so on. These projectedand experienced benefits to the electricity sector include suchmatters as:

1. Declining prices to most classes of customers. While pricesmay not decline at the same rate to all groups (with largerindustrial customers seeing the largest decreases), most haveseen the price of electricity go down.

2. Increasing choice of suppliers. As has been observed with air-lines and telecommunications, there has been a remarkableincrease in service providers, which has increased choices tonearly all classes of customers.

3. Opportunities to choose reliability levels. Some of the cost sav-ings have resulted from the ability of customers to choose lev-els of reliability of electric supply (interruptible rates, peakshaving supply reductions and so on). Because such choicesallow electricity suppliers to make optimal use of electric sup-ply, they can pass savings on to such customers.


4. Expanded sources of investment capital. This has been mostnotable when state monopolies have been both privatized andderegulated. In those instances, private direct investment hasbeen attracted in lieu of limited governmental resources, andfrequently this investment flow has been from offshoresources. However, even deregulation of private power franchisesystems has seen an increase in new capital, especially in thecase of Independent Power Producers in several of theeconomies.

5. Increased productivity in the electricity sector. This benefithas been observed in most places where deregulation hasoccurred, though the sources of increased productivity havevaried. In all cases, competitive pressures have sharpenedskills in reducing fuel and other procurement costs, reduc-ing costs in central administration, selling off unnecessaryassets, which were money losers, and other such financialcontrol techniques. In other instances, personnel reductionshave been noted as well as quite dramatic restructuringfrom vertically integrated systems to unbundled stand-alone businesses.

6. Increased international competitiveness of electricity-intensiveeconomic sectors. Due to the increases in efficiency and reducedcosts of electricity, industries in those countries which haveundergone deregulation and restructuring have reduced theircosts—quite dramatically in some instances. These reduced costshave made these industries more competitive in global marketsfor their products, and perhaps retained such industries in-coun-try rather than moving them to lower-cost locations.

In addition, Workshop participants suggested that whereverderegulation of this and other economic sectors has occurred, thereseems to have been no instance where full re-regulation, franchisingor monopoly systems have been reinstated. While some revision ofregulations can be expected, at least thus far there has been generalagreement that the benefits of deregulation outweigh problemsexperienced in the deregulation process.


8



9

The discussions at this Workshop suggested that while the theoreti-cal values were not disputed, there were concerns about the impacts ofmaking the transition from national monopoly electricity sector sys-tems to deregulated and/or privatized entities. The potential negativeimpacts that were of concern to some included the following:

1. Reductions in employment levels where the electric system hadbeen utilized as a tool for employment enhancement. While suchpractices were recognized as adding substantially to costs of elec-tricity, any reductions in employee levels would have to be donevery gradually in order not to increase unemployment sharply.

2. Loss of sectoral subsidies embedded in current systems, resultingin price increases to some classes of service. Because such cross-subsidies may have been in place for many decades, it is political-ly difficult to make rapid changes in such policies—though it waswidely recognized that such price-distorting policies will need tobe phased out.

3. Concern about how to shift social policy goals from the electricsector to other government mechanisms. In addition to thecross-subsidy problems noted above, the national electric sectorsmay have been used to implement other policy goals such asextending service to remote areas at highly subsidized rates, lowerrates for certain age groups or public institutions such as hos-pitals, schools, government entities, and so on. While appreci-ating that such public goals may be laudable, it was also notedthat such implicit subsidies distort price/cost signals in theelectric sector and reduce efficiency in various degrees ofseverity, and perhaps might be better implemented throughother government programs.

4. Concerns about foreign domination in this sector. For someeconomies, deregulation and the opening of the electric sectorintroduced the possibility of a large foreign presence in thissector, which previously had been a government activity.Though this prospect was noted as a concern by some, theexperience in most economies was that such external invest-ment had not been a negative factor.


6. Concerns that deregulation might have less desirable environ-mental outcomes than would occur in a regulated structure.Some comments during the discussions indicated concern thata loss of government control of the electricity sector may bringnegative environmental effects as competitive forces looked toreduce costs. However, it was generally agreed that environ-mental standards were the province of the government in eacheconomy, and that a deregulated electric sector must workwithin whatever environmental standards were established forair and water quality, effluent controls, waste disposal andother environmental concerns.

An additional complication to deregulation was noted in sever-al of the economies where all or most fuels were imported. Inorder to encourage new entrants for the purposes of competitionin the electric sector, it is necessary that any potential new entranthave access to generation fuels under comparable price and vol-ume conditions as all others competing in the field. If incumbentorganizations have preferential access, then competition will bethwarted. Of course, this is a condition that would be necessarywhether or not the fuels are imported. A level playing field in bothprice and access to fuels (as well as fairly priced access to trans-mission and/or distribution facilities) is necessary if true compe-tition is to be successful. Preferential access to these key inputs willdistort competition and lower (or even deny) the benefits of suchderegulation.

Finally, participants noted that there are differing motivations forthe process of restructuring across the region. In the case of someeconomies, the motivation is primarily access to external capitalresources. The rapid growth of electricity demand has outstrippedthe capacity of the governments to expand generation, transmissionand distribution facilities. Further, the existing tariff structure isinadequate to fund such needed facilities growth. In such instances,the need for restructuring both for greater efficiency and for capitalto carry out required facility expansion has been a key motivation.In other economies, external capital is not as important, so the need


10


for more competitive and efficient systems has been the key driverfor deregulation.

Deregulation or privatization or restructuring of the electricitysector in the Pacific Rim region is not a new phenomenon, but theprocess has accelerated in the past two years or so. Indeed, it wasstriking to observe the very detailed planning for restructuring inthis sector by virtually all economies in this key area of the world.While the financial crisis may have added some motivation, in someinstances it also has caused timetables to be delayed, and some plansto be further refined—but there was little evidence of turning awayfrom the process. While such major changes might be expected totake longer than originally planned due to complex political andother such causes, it appeared as though the benefits were widelyseen as worth the effort and time required to carry out such plans.The reasons for this steady and even quickening pace are varied, butamong them such matters as the following were pointed out in thediscussions:

1. Financial crises in the Asia region, and requirements of IMF-imposed structural reforms. For those economies that accept-ed IMF loans during the financial upheavals of the past 2 or 3years, various agreements were made to increase deregulationin the electricity sectors. While these reforms were imposed byexternal requirements, most of these economies have agreedwith the inherent benefits that may be obtained.

2. Government concerns about inefficiencies in monopoly elec-tric sectors. As mentioned earlier, many economies recognizedthe need to upgrade the quality and efficiency of this key sec-tor. While there are lingering concerns about making a transi-tion from the social goals that have been embedded in the elec-tric system, there was general agreement about the need toupgrade efficiencies in this sector.

3. Increased international competitiveness requiring more effi-cient and lower cost electricity in domestic economies. As dis-cussed in the section on the reasons for deregulation, there is


11


wide recognition that inefficiencies in this sector can have a seri-ous negative impact on international competitiveness of domes-tic industries, particularly those which are highly electricity inten-sive. The financial crisis magnified the awareness of this factor.

Finally, the discussions suggested that deregulation and privatiza-tion of the electricity sector are occurring simultaneously with rapidtechnology, financial, political and social changes in economiesthroughout the Asia-Pacific region. The changes in the electricitysector are not being carried out in isolation, and are affected bystructural alterations within each economy. As a result of these com-plex changes, it is not unreasonable to expect that the pace and out-comes of electricity deregulation will not be uniform throughoutthe region. While each economy may find a somewhat differentpath, there seemed to be little doubt that implementation of someform of deregulation of this sector would continue across the region.

Energy Trade and Infrastructure

Crude and Product MarketsOther energy sectors in the region are also facing complex chal-

lenges as local economies begin the process of recovery from thefinancial crisis. Oil and product demand plummeted over the pasttwo years, putting strong pressure on refining margins in theregion. And even though demand is now increasing and additionsto refining capacity are underway, it is expected that there will beincreasingly strong cost competition from Middle East productexports into the Asia-Pacific area. Finally, crude oil imports willcontinue to increase into this region, a trend that is expected toaccelerate over the next decade. While such competition fromproduct import activity may put pressure on local refineries, suchprice competition likely represents good news for users of oilproducts throughout the regions. Because economies in theregion span the range of major oil and oil product producers tomajor importers, there was a wide variance of views among par-ticipants on the recent price increases.


12


Natural GasNatural gas supplies, whether transported as LNG or via pipeline,

are of substantial interest to economies in the region. This interest isbased on the relatively short lead time of gas combined cycle powerplants to enable early increases in generation capacity, and on the rela-tive cleanliness of natural gas combustion, which can help to relievesevere air quality problems in many major cities in the region.

However, the cost of LNG appears to be a barrier to rapid growthof this form of transport, and has given impetus to interest in anexpanded natural gas pipeline system in the region. This pipelinesystem would not only interconnect supply sources within theregion, but would tap into reserves in continental Russia, offshoreRussia, and other nations of the former Soviet Union with massivegas reserves remote from other demand centers. The cost of suchpipeline systems is still rather speculative, but some may be feasibleunder longer-term contract arrangements. However, there remainsconcern about the security of such systems, especially regardingthird country transit. There appears to be no body of internationallaw that covers such pipeline transit arrangements, but it also is notclear there is a basis for serious concerns in view of the history ofsuch transit arrangements. When agreed bills are paid, and in theabsence of war, no instance could be cited where such transitarrangements have been disrupted.

CoalDespite the stated enthusiasm for natural gas, coal usage for elec-

tric power generation in the region continues to increase at a steadypace. There has been a steady growth of both domestic and import-ed coal use for the past 15 years, and this rate of growth is expectedto continue for the foreseeable future. While some uncertainty aboutglobal rules on greenhouse gas emissions remains, efficiency gains incoal-fired plants give the prospect for reductions in all emission lev-els. If pipeline gas is available in sufficient quantities and at compet-itive prices, it can be a serious competitor for fuel choice in new gen-eration facilities in some locations—especially where load-followingis important. But it is expected that total coal use will continue toincrease in any event.


13


Electricity InterconnectionsInterest in regional gas pipeline infrastructure is paralleled by an

increased interest in expanding electricity interconnections acrossthe Asia-Pacific region. Experience in the U.S. suggests that thewidest possible transmission network encourages system reliability,efficiency and economies of scale. Asia-Pacific economies could ben-efit from such system gains as well, plus taking advantage of poten-tial generation sites, including several hydropower options, morefavorably located across national boundaries. Again, while the theo-retical benefits were noted, concerns about security of such trans-mission supply lines remained to be resolved.

Review of Individual Economies

Reviews of electricity deregulation and related energy matters inthe economies of the region suggested that progress toward a rangeof goals was continuing. The economic crisis necessitated delays inthe timetables for achieving goals for restructuring, but in mostinstances the goals were not compromised in significant ways.Globalization of economic activity acts as a continued pressure toachieve high levels of efficiency in all domestic sectors, even whilegovernments are seeking to preserve key cultural and social values.Though tensions arise in these processes of transition, it appears asthough economies of the Asia-Pacific region remain optimisticabout future success in economic progress while retaining impor-tant social value systems.


14


Participants

Guillermo R. BalceExecutive DirectorACE Building, 6th Fl.,JL. H.R. Rasuna Said, Blok X-2,

Kav. 07 & 08Kuningan, Jakarta 12950

Indonesia

Pio J. BenavidezVice PresidentStrategic Power Utility Group &

Projects Management &Engineering Services

National Power CorporationCor. Quezon Ave. & Agham

RoadDiliman, Quezon City,

Philippines, 1600

Koomchoak BiyaemAssistant GovernorPolicy and Planning, Electricity

Generating Authority ofThailand

53 Charan Sanit Wong Road,Bang Kruai

Nonthaburi, Thailand 11130,

Martin BonouManagerEnergy Planning, Energy

Division, Department ofPetroleum and Energy

PO Box 494Waigani, NCD Papua, New Guinea

Hyun-Joon ChangPresidentKorea Energy Economics

Institute665-1 Naeson-DongEuiwang City, Kyungki-do,Korea 437-082


Ian CoddingtonManaging DirectorCoddington International Pty.

Ltd.PO Box 578Milsons Point, NSW 2061Australia

Loren C. CoxAssociate DirectorPrograms on CEEPR and

Global Climate ChangeMassachusetts Institute of

Technology350 Belaire CourtPunta Gorda, FL 33950

Stephen Del RegnoConsultant/Advisor1212 Lions Garden City8-2 Namiki-cho, Narita CityChiba-kenJapan 286-0045

Tilaklal K. DoshiChief Asia EconomistUnocal Corporation501 Orchard Road#04-06/08 Wheelock PlaceSingapore 23880

Juan EibenschutzSubdireccion de ProductionLuz y Fuerza del CentroMelchor Ocampo 171-503Col. TlaxpanaMexico, D.F. 11379

Zhou FengqiDirectorEnergy Research InstituteState Development Planning

Commission & ChineseAcademy of Science

Zhansimen, Shahe, ChangpingBeijing, China 102206

John G. VennGeneral Manager, Power & GasCaltex Services Ptl. Ltd.30 Raffles Place#25-00 Caltex HouseSingapore 048622

Weiping HaoDeputy DirectorPower Division, Department of

Basic IndustriesState Development Planning

CommissionBeijing, China

Hassan IbrahimSenior Team LeaderAsia Pacific Energy Research

Centre (APERC)Shuwa-Kamiyacho Bldg., 4-3-13Toranomon, Minato-Ku, Tokyo Japan 105-001

Toshio InoueChief EconomistCosmo Oil Co. Ltd.1-1-1, Shibaura, Minato-ku,Tokyo, Japan 105-8528


16


Yuichi Ishida,OfficialAgency of Natural Resources

and Energy, MITI1-3-1 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-

ku,Tokyo, Japan 100-8391

David JhiradSenior Advisor for International

AffairsU.S. Department of Energy1000 Independence Ave. SWWashington, DC 20585

Ira H. JollesSenior Vice President and

General CounselGPU, Inc.300 Madison AvenuePO Box 1911Morristown, New Jersey 07962

Gerald KlennerPrincipalMcKinsey and Co.Two Houston Center- Suite

3500Houston, Texas 77010

Shiro KonishiGeneral ManagerAsia Pacific Energy Research

Centre (APERC)Shuwa-Kamiyacho Bldg., 4-3-

13, Toranomon,Minato-Ku, Tokyo Japan 105-001

Barrie LeayChief ExecutiveEcodyne Ltd.PO Box 17072Wellington, New Zealand

Dora Y. LeeCommercial DirectorChina ProjectsConsolidated Electric Power

Asia Ltd.18th Floor, Hongkong Telecom

TowerTaikoo Place, 979 King’s RoadQuarry Bay, Hong Kong, China

Hoesung LeePresidentCouncil on Energy and

Environment Korea14 Floor Byuksan Bld. 12

Donja-DongYongsan-Ku, Seoul, Korea

Lenny LeeManaging DirectorAES Transpower Private Ltd.6 Battery Road # 16-06Singapore 049909

Thierry LefevreDirectorCentre for Energy-Environment

Research and DevelopmentAsian Institute of TechnologyKm 42, Paholyothin HighwayKlong Luang, PathumthaniThailand 12120


17


Kevin LillisEconomistOffice of Integrated Analysis

and ForecastingEnergy Information

AdministrationUS Department of Energy1000 Independence AvenueWashington, DC 20585

Ichiro MaedaManagerPlanning & Overseas Research

Group /International AffairsDepartment

Tokyo Electric Power Company1-1-3 Uchisaiwai-cho, Chiyoda-

kuTokyo, Japan 100-0011

Shigeru MurakiChief ManagerResearch & Project

Development / Gas ResourcesDepartment

Tokyo Gas Co. Ltd.1-5-20 Kaigan, Minato-kuTokyo, Japan 105-8527

Datuk Ir. Mohammed AnnasHaji Mohammed NorDirector GeneralDepartment of Electricity and

Gas Supply19th-21st Floor Menara Haw Par, Jalan Sultan

IsmailKuala Lumpur, Malayasia 50668

J.P. (Phil) PrincePresident & CEOCanadian Energy Research

Institute#150, 3512-33 Street N.W.Calgary, ABCanada T2L 2A6

John A. RiggsExecutive DirectorProgram on Energy, the

Environment, and theEconomy

The Aspen InstituteOne Dupont Circle NW- Suite

700Washington, DC 20036

Ji-Chul RyuVice-PresidentAsia Pacific Energy Research

Centre (APERC)Shuwa-Kamiyacho Bldg., 4-3-13Toranomon, Minato-KuTokyo, Japan 105-001

Ian R. StraughanSenior Vice PresidentUnocal Asia Pacific Ventures,

Ltd.501 Orchard Rd, #04-06/08

Wheelock PlaceSingapore 238880


18


Gerald M. StokesAssociate Laboratory DirectorEnvironmental & Health

Science DivisionPacific Northwest National

LaboratoryPO Box 999- MSIN: K9-95

Richland, WA 99352

Jing-sheng SuSupervisor of the Third

DivisionEnergy Commission, Ministry

of Economic Affairs13th Fl./No.2, Fu-Hsing North

RoadTaipei, Chinese Taipei

Luluk SumiarsoDirectorDirectorate General of

Electricity and EnergyDevelopment

Ministry of Mines and EnergyJ1. H.R. Rasuna Said, Block x-2Kav. 07-08Jakarta, Indonesia 12950

Hoff StaufferVice PresidentA.T. Kearney153 East 53 St. 27th FloorNew York, New York 10022,

USA

Roger J. StuartManagerTrade and Global Climate

Change Branch, ABAREEdmund Barton Building,

Broughton and MacquarieSteets,

Barton ACTGPO Box 1563, CanberraACT 2601, Australia

Chong Cheong YinDirectorElectricity Regulation Division,

Department of Electricity andGas Supply

19-21st Floor, Menara Haw Par,Jalan Sultan Ismai, Kaula

LumparMalaysia 50668

Keiichi YokoboriPresidentAsia Pacific Energy Research

Centre (APERC)Shuwa-Kamiyacho Bldg., 4-3-

13, ToranomonMinato-Ku, Tokyo Japan 105-001

Wu ZongxinDirectorInstitute of Nuclear Energy

TechnologyTsinghua UniversityPO Box 1021Beijing, China 102201


19


The Aspen Institute

Program on Energy,the Environment, and the Economy

The mission of The Aspen Institute is to enhance the quality ofleadership through informed dialogue about the timeless ideas andvalues of the world’s great cultures and traditions as they relate tothe challenges facing societies, organizations, and individuals. TheSeminar Programs enable leaders to draw on these values to enrichtheir understanding of contemporary issues. The Policy Programsframe the choices that democratic societies face in terms of theenduring ideas and values derived from those traditions.

The Program on Energy, the Environment, and the Economyprovides neutral ground for dialogue among diverse participantsfrom the energy industry, government, environmental and otherpublic interest groups, research institutions, and elsewhere.Meetings in a non-adversarial setting encourage positive, candidinteraction and seek areas of consensus or improved mutual under-standing. Recent activities of this Program are listed below.

The annual Energy Policy Forum is the flagship of the Program.Now in its 23nd year, its high level participation, lively discussion, andcongenial setting cause some of the most thoughtful and influentialleaders in the energy sector to return again and again to grapple withtimely topics facing energy policy makers. Session chairs and speakersserve only as discussion starters; participants with different perspectivescontribute to and enrich the dialogue, with the goal of enhanced under-standing and, where possible, consensus on policy recommendations.


The Pacific Rim Series, founded in 1983, consists of annualworkshops for experts from industry, government, and other insti-tutions to discuss Asian energy issues.

The Series on the Environment in the 21st Century is a contin-uing dialogue among business, environmental, and governmentleaders about developing a new, less prescriptive, and more effectiveenvironmental protection system for the United States. In its mostrecent phase, participants considered new ways to deal with naturalresources and systems.

Valuing Environmental Performance, a dialogue among corpora-tions and financial institutions, sought ways for corporations to bettercommunicate the strategic value of their environmental behavior andfor financial markets to recognize and reward improvements.

A series on Disposition and Storage of Nuclear Waste—Implications for Nonproliferation and the Environment is meetingperiodically to allow a small number of experts and advocates fromgovernment, industry, academia, and public interest organizations toseek consensus on—and improve communication and understandingamong adversaries regarding—civilian and defense nuclear waste.

The Mexico-US Border Environment and Economy is a dialogueamong private and public sector leaders to identify for bothPresidents factors that make a difference in managing growth at theborder and ways of dealing with those factors.

John A. Riggs is Executive Director of The Aspen Institute’s Programon Energy, the Environment, and the Economy. Prior to joining theInstitute he was Deputy Assistant Secretary and Acting AssistantSecretary for Policy in the U.S. Department of Energy and staff directorof the Energy and Power Subcommittee of the U.S. House ofRepresentatives. He has also taught energy and environmental policy atthe University of Pennsylvania.

Susan OMalley Wade is Associate Director of the Program. Withspecialties in natural resources management and environmental dis-


22


pute resolution, she has worked as an environmental consultant inthe private sector, with the California Environmental ProtectionAgency, and on the staff of a U.S. House of RepresentativesCommittee.

Peter A. Johnson is Senior Associate of the Program. He was for-merly Director of the Marine Board at the National Academy ofSciences/National Research Council and Senior Associate at theOffice of Technology Assessment, where he directed projects oncleanup of the nuclear weapons complex, dismantlement of nuclearweapons, management of nuclear materials, and environmentalimpacts of nuclear waste dumping in the Arctic.


23


With All Deliberate Speed: Electricity Restructuring in Asia fileWith All Deliberate Speed: ......

Documents

Transcript of With All Deliberate Speed: Electricity Restructuring in Asia fileWith All Deliberate Speed: ......