Helmut Kostreba wrote:

>"The other thing that raised my eyebrows was that even
though some 30
>to 40 % of Japan's electricity was produced throught
nuclear power
>plants, the country is still running even though
virtually all plants
>have been closed."

Japan has depended on nukes for 25-30% of its electricity in recent years. Part of the answer is that demand for electricity is down from normal levels because manufacturing--which uses almost 30% of electricity--is still down 14% from Dec. 2007 peak and because GDP is still down about 4% from late 2007 peak.
In 2010, before the disaster, electricity output was still down almost 9% from the 2007 peak. In addition, utilities have plugged in a whole bunch of generators that run on oil or LNG or coal (some of them quite old), and in the final quarter of 2011, nukes still provided 10% of total electricity.

This summer, when all (or virtually all) of the nukes will be off-line, will be more of a test. But the real test of how well Japan can do without nukes will come when GDP and industrial production get back to peak levels and then try to grow from there.

I also suspect that there is a lot of low-hanging fruit on the conservation side. Almost a third of electricity is used for lighting.
How much of that usage could be reducd by installing motion detectors?

On the anecdote side, I happened to be in Tokyo just before Christmas.
Near one of the newish luxury hotels in Roppongi, Dubai World sponsored a spectacular light show that must have taken an entire nuclear plant to run. Then, there was the METI building, where officials were doing penance.
Before 3/11, I recall going down a hall with great motion detectors. The hallway was fairly dim, but as you walked down the hall, a moving column of light paved your way. After 3/11, all the bulbs had been removed. One had to navigate using the light coming into the hallway from the offices.

Richard Katz
The Oriental Economist Report