Twitter
Google plus
Facebook
Vimeo
Pinterest

Fluid Edge Themes

Japan’s gas dependence needs a rethink, starting with a new steel plant

Analysis report · Transition Asia · October 2026

“Japan is in its third gas crisis in 5 years. As its steelmakers switch to electric furnaces, where those furnaces get their power decides how exposed Japanese steel is to the next one.”

Full report Report-PDF Executive summary Explore the findings

One furnace, two ways to power it

Japan spends about ¥25tn a year on imported fossil fuels, and gas prices have spiked three times since 2021: in the 2021 winter squeeze, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz in March 2026. At the same time, Japanese steelmakers are replacing coal-fired blast furnaces with electric arc furnaces. That cuts coal use, but it makes electricity a primary raw material, at about 650 kWh per tonne of steel.

Nippon Steel plans a 2 Mt electric furnace at Yawata, powered by its own 2 GW LNG plant from 2031. We use it as a case study of what the gas route means in practice. We price the same furnace on the captive LNG plant and on the Kyushu grid with renewable power contracts, at real 2020–mid-2026 prices and in 4,000 simulated futures for 2029–2045.

¥30,600/tpower cost per tonne of steel at the 2022 spot LNG peak, against about ¥6,400 normally
11 daysof fuel for the full plant at Nippon Steel’s share of the shared tanks; supply outages last months
2030the year Kyushu’s grid becomes cleaner than the LNG plant, before its first unit runs
¥30–136bnyearly cost in 2040 of the plant’s 4.4 Mt of CO₂, from current-policy to Net Zero carbon prices

The gas route carries every LNG crisis into the cost of steel

A captive LNG plant turns the fuel price straight into a steel cost, and its emissions are fixed for the plant’s life while the grid it competes with keeps getting cleaner.

Power cost per tonne of steel, by LNG price

0¥10k¥20k¥30k$10/MMBtu2025 average¥6,400$24.8/MMBtu2026 spot peak¥15,800$48/MMBtu2022 spot peak¥30,600

Emission factor, kg CO₂ per kWh

00.10.20.30.40.520252030203520402045LNG plant 0.359, from 2031Kyushu grid 0.065 by 20402030: the grid is cleaner

Left: power cost on the LNG plant at ¥150/$, assuming all fuel is bought at that price. On the central contract mix, power peaked at about 9% of the hot-rolled coil price in 2020–2026, against about 6% normally. Right: published Kyushu Electric emission factors to 2025, then a straight line to Kyushu Electric’s 2035 target and the government’s 2040 policy target; the LNG plant’s factor is Nippon Steel’s own figure.

Key findings

Click a finding to open it.

Price shocks pass straight through to steel
At the 2022 spot LNG peak, power for the furnace would have cost about ¥30,600 per tonne of steel, 25% of the hot-rolled coil price at the time, against about ¥6,400 normally. The March 2026 spot peak ($24.8/MMBtu) reads about ¥15,800 per tonne, 2.5 times normal, and the weaker yen pushes the real 2026 figure higher.
Long-term contracts protect less each time, and lengthen the gas commitment
Oil-linked contracts made a heavily termed fuel mix 35% cheaper than a spot-exposed one in 2022, but only 26% in the first half of 2026, because the Hormuz closure lifted oil as well as gas. In 2022 the gap was worth ¥71bn a year at Yawata’s scale. Yawata’s LNG contracts are not yet signed, and no mix is safe: spot brings price risk, and long-term contracts bring a longer gas commitment with shrinking protection.
The fuel buffer lasts days; LNG outages last months
At Nippon Steel’s 25% equity share of the shared K-LNG tanks, the full plant has about 11 days of fuel. Documented LNG supply outages have lasted 2 to 26 months, and prices and volumes tend to fail together: one illustrative episode, 30% of supply lost for 3 months and replaced at $30/MMBtu, costs about ¥27bn, if replacement cargoes exist at all.
A margin risk, not a solvency risk, until shocks combine
In 4,000 simulated futures, a 1-in-20 bad gas year adds about ¥16bn, roughly 1% of Nippon Steel’s cash and credit lines. The danger is a fuel spike, a steel price slump and the Yawata capital programme landing together.
The grid overtakes the plant before it starts, and the steel stays above the near-zero line
Kyushu’s grid falls below the plant’s 0.359 kg CO₂/kWh in 2030 and to about 0.065 by 2040, while the plant is planned to run to about 2056. Steel from the furnace stays at about 278 kg CO₂ per tonne, against the IEA near-zero line of about 110 for this scrap share. The ¥40bn-a-year green-steel tax credit is paid either way, because the rule rewards the switch to an electric furnace, not the power behind it.
On cost the LNG plant wins today; the grid spreads gas risk
Buying the same electricity entirely at Kyushu spot prices would cost about ¥114–131bn a year, against the plant’s ¥95bn with capital included. Grid power is not gas-free; its case is how it handles gas risk over time: many fuels, pooled supply, fixed-price renewable contracts, and a gas share that shrinks every year. To a grid buyer, a fixed-price solar contract is worth up to ¥14–16/kWh as crisis insurance. Whether the grid can connect and firmly serve a furnace load of this size is the next question, and one for steelmakers, utilities, grid operators and METI together.

The alternative: the grid plus renewable contracts

Grid + renewable contracts Captive LNG plant
Fuels behind the power Nuclear, coal, solar, gas, hydro, geothermal LNG only
Fuel supply Many terminals, utility portfolios, interconnectors One shared terminal, about 11 days at its share
Price protection Fixed-price renewable contracts Depends on LNG contracts not yet signed
Emissions Fall with the grid every year Fixed for the plant’s life
Near-zero steel Reached as the grid cleans up, by about 2040 Not reached at 0.359 kg/kWh

The route is already in use. Nippon Steel’s own new electric furnace at Košice in Slovakia will run on grid power from 2030.

Flexible melting turns surplus into an input. Kyushu curtailed 4.5–9.1% of its solar output each year in 2023–2025; a furnace that shifts melting into those hours buys cheap clean power.

What must change

The electric furnaces still to be built are not locked in.

Steelmakers

Benchmark the next furnace against grid power plus renewable contracts over its full life, with carbon costs and low-emission steel sales. Contract clean power around the clock, build furnaces that melt flexibly, and keep any gas commitment short and switchable.

Investors

Price the carbon and combined-stress risk, not just the fuel cost. Before backing the next furnace, ask for a grid benchmark, the planned LNG contract mix and how long it runs, the firm storage entitlement, the carbon price assumed, and how the steel will be sold as low-emission.

Policymakers

Add a carbon-intensity condition on the electricity behind the green-steel tax credit. Fund clean power industry can buy around the clock, not only fuel subsidies, and plan new furnaces’ grid connections with utilities and grid operators. No free GX-ETS allocation for new captive fossil plants.

Central case: 58% plant efficiency (LHV), 0.359 kg CO₂/kWh, 650 kWh/t, ¥150/$, and an LNG mix of 44% oil-linked, 36% US-gas-linked and 20% spot. For information only; not investment advice. The report represents the authors’ views and interpretations of publicly available information.

“Japan’s energy shocks come from fossil dependence. The next electric furnaces can reduce that exposure, or add to it.”

Full report Report-PDF Executive summary

Authors

Dr. Liying Qiu
Lead author
Dr. Liying Qiu (Lilly)

Senior Research Associate, Transition Asia

Akira Kanno
Author
Akira Kanno

Research Analyst, Transition Asia