How AZEC and Japan Are Pushing Fossil Fuel-based Solutions in Asia

The Asia Zero Emission Community (AZEC) was launched by Japan’s then-Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in early 2023, as a “platform for cooperation towards carbon neutrality/net-zero emissions in the Asia region.” Its goals have been stated as achieving net-zero emissions through “various pathways” and supporting Asian countries’ economic growth, energy security, and decarbonisation.

While that might sound good, in reality, AZEC has been pushing fossil fuel-based false solutions over renewables like wind, solar and geothermal, risking Asia’s energy transition and global climate goals. 

“The AZEC initiative poses a grave threat to the future of a just and equitable energy transition in Indonesia and across Asia,” said Hikmat Soeriatanuwijaya, senior partnership and outreach officer at Oil Change International. “AZEC not only prolongs our dependence on dirty energy, but also jeopardises the livelihoods of communities on the front lines of climate change, delays our progress toward clean energy and threatens to lock us into a carbon-intensive future.”

How Asia Zero Emissions Community (AZEC) Pushes Fossil Fuel-based Solutions

AZEC is playing a role in regional energy policy-making. Japanese government entities are helping Asian countries develop energy strategies and plans, and through that, pushing worrying technologies like carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), ammonia and biomass co-firing and liquefied natural gas (LNG), which are being increasingly included in national net-zero and decarbonisation plans. 

In fact, already dozens of memorandums of understanding and project agreements have been formulated under AZEC. An analysis from Zero Carbon Analytics found that many AZEC projects support fossil fuel technologies. These include projects supporting the production or use of fossil gas, or LNG, as a “transition fuel,” pilots for ammonia or biomass co-firing in coal-fired power plants and projects pushing for the expansion of CCS technology. All are framed, under AZEC, as supporting decarbonisation and a transition away from coal, widely considered the dirtiest fossil fuel, across the region.

“A closer look into the AZEC agreements raises concerns about costs and climate impacts,” said Amy Kong, a research associate at Zero Carbon Analytics. “Relying on these technologies is a slower and more expensive path to decarbonisation for the region, and risks derailing national power sector emissions targets.”

“Japan is now the world’s second-largest public financier of international fossil fuel projects, spending more than AUD 7 billion every year,” said Dr. Wesley Morgan, a research associate at the Institute of Climate Risk and Response at University of New South Wales Sydney. 

AZEC’s Fossil Fuel-based false solutions

There are three main false solutions being promoted by Japan across the 11 AZEC member countries: fossil gas, ammonia or biomass co-firing and carbon capture and sequestration. All perpetuate the use of fossil fuels and will do little to actually decarbonise the region.

Fossil Gas – LNG

Fossil gas, also called LNG, is being pushed as a cleaner transition fuel as the region moves away from coal due to its lower greenhouse gas emissions when burned. But new research shows that, when the life-cycle emissions are calculated, fossil gas is as bad as coal. 

Ammonia-Coal Co-firing and Biomass Co-firing

Co-firing might be even worse. This is the blending of so-called cleaner fuels – woody biomass, mostly in the form of wood pellets and ammonia with coal in thermal power plants. The idea is that this will reduce emissions in the short-term, and over time, coal will be gradually replaced. But, again, the science is shaky. There isn’t a proven technological path to 100% ammonia burning, and ammonia itself has a large greenhouse gas footprint.

Carbon Capture and Storage

Meanwhile, CCS has been promised since at least the 1970s, but remains technologically unfeasible and extremely expensive. According to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, CCS is “an expensive and unproven technology that distracts from global decarbonisation efforts while allowing the oil and gas industry to conduct business as usual,” and “can only provide minimal contribution to decarbonisation.” 

“Fossil-based technologies, such as ammonia co-firing, CCS, grey and blue hydrogen, and LNG have much higher lifecycle emissions than solar and wind,” said Kong.

What Asia Needs

There’s another risk for Japan – that focusing on costly and expensive fossil-fuel based solutions harms its reputation as a regional leader. 

“The prominence of fossil fuel-related projects in AZEC threatens the credibility of the initiative, and by extension, Japan’s reliability as a decarbonisation partner,” said Hanna Hakko, a senior associate at the nonprofit think tank E3G. “Japan’s support would serve the region far better by enabling the growth of renewable energy to improve energy security, strengthen clean economic growth, and alleviate climate risks.”

There is a better path for AZEC to truly promote zero-carbon solutions, ones that not only help Asian countries decarbonise but also promote a just transition for communities facing the brunt of climate impacts. These include solar, wind and energy efficiency.

“We deserve a comprehensive energy transition rooted in social and environmental justice – not one based on Japanese corporate interests,” said Soeriatanuwijaya.