PGIQ Rating v2 (reliability-adjusted) · as of June 2026
4

🇯🇵 Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz)

Possible, but expect friction, holding steady Reliability flags found
Tier 4 Constrained · Composite 40/100, #73 of 79 markets (fundamentals 47 minus a reliability dock) · Outlook Stable · Med confidence · how we score

Tokyo is a top-five global hub, but the 50Hz eastern grid (TEPCO) is the tighter, pricier half. It issued Japan's first-ever power shortage warnings in 2022 and cannot freely draw on the western surplus across the limited frequency link.

See Japan system conditions →
One market,
four reads
BuildTier 4Siting ratingSellGrade COfftakePlanHeavyLoad pressureMonitorWeakGrid strength
The same market, four decisions. Open any lens to see this market ranked against the rest.
Time to energize · file to power
~90 mo
File a large load today, powered ~2034. Typical range 63 to 117 months, modelled.
Application & capacity study 12mo · Grid connection study & offer 18mo · Substation & network reinforcement 42mo · Construction & energization 18mo
End-to-end wait for a large new load, from an unstated start to an unstated end. Earlier milestones (initial, phased, temporary or conditional energization) are reported separately. A typical case, not a firm quote. · Source: Shulman Advisory: TEPCO PG connection lead time · Compare markets →

Grid conditions now

Structural baseline, June 2026Open the live map for Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz) →
System context, not a Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz) measurement. Japan system conditions, shown as context for Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz). This is not a measurement specific to Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz). Zonal price, local network margin and interchange are not available at this scope.
Demand
50,000 MW
Structural baseline, June 2026
Wholesale price
not available at this scope
Zonal or local. The parent system value would be a different quantity, not a coarser one.
Carbon intensity
450 g/kWh
Structural baseline, June 2026
Low-carbon share
27%
Structural baseline, June 2026
The same market, read four ways

Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz) is a limited market to sell power into

Grade C (Limited)
Offtake score 50/100
Demand 66, build feasibility 22, combined into the score. For a seller: where buyers already pay, how tight supply is, and how feasible new build is here.
Price to beat
A 100 MW load on our standard case pays about $160/MWh delivered here. A competitive supply offer works against that level.
Connection
Connection difficulty Severe, typical wait 5-10 years.
Scheduled to change
By 2027: Frequency-converter capacity between the 50Hz east and 60Hz west rises toward 3 GW (Japan east-west converter capacity (Wikipedia)).
See it on the Offtake Grade →

Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz): effectively full at system level, heavy demand pressure

Effectively full 0/100
System-level room, not local capacity
Local capacity: not assessed. We have found no operator publication of area or substation capacity for this market, so whether the bus serving a candidate site can take the load is an open question. Absence of a finding here is not evidence that capacity exists.
Two reads for a grid planner: how much room the system as a whole looks to have (Effectively full), and how hard demand is already pushing (Heavy). The first is a market-level estimate from connection ease, forward adequacy and reliability margin. It is not local deliverability. Capacity at a specific substation is not assessed for this market, and a market can look roomy while the bus you want has nothing available. Confirm local capacity with the utility before relying on it.
Demand growth
Fast load growth in our read, the pull on your system.
Future firm supply
Future firm supply: tight for a large new load.
Load Pipeline Reality → Where demand is hungry → Connection friction →

Grid Risk Annex BETA

Weak
Deep conditions or guarantees needed · grid strength 37/100
A cited, dated grid-risk read on Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz) for a capital provider, the banks and private-credit lenders, infrastructure funds and insurers holding or underwriting a power or data-centre exposure here. Drop it into a credit memo and watch each factor over the life of the exposure.
Read it against your asset. For a load asset (Buy), weight connection access and energization timing. For a generation or offtake asset (Sell), weight offtake demand, curtailment (being told to cut output or consumption) and cost realisation. For a grid or transmission asset (Move), weight load-pipeline reality and buildout risk.
Rating and track record
PGIQ Tier 4 Constrained, outlook Stable, Med confidence. Scored on a public, dated, falsifiable record you can cite in a credit memo.
Delivery reliability
Reliability flags found in the bulk and local outage record we reviewed.
Future firm supply
Future firm supply: tight.
Cost certainty
Recurring cost $135 to $190/MWh for the standard 100 MW case, basis modelled. Excludes connection capital.
Regulatory / stroke-of-pen
Not assessed.
Execution risk
Connection friction Severe, the risk the project or load actually energizes on time.
Ongoing monitor
Track this market's rating actions as a covenant-style monitor over the life of the exposure.
Monitoring plan
Covenant-style triggers to watch over the life of the exposure: a change in the PGIQ rating or outlook; a dated regulatory move (stroke-of-pen risk); a capacity-auction or cost-band shift; a forward firm-supply adequacy warning; and a rise in queue drop-out or connection friction. Track them on this market page, or as Analyst Desk alerts.
Sources: Tokyo first-ever power shortage warning 2022 (Nippon.com) · Japan east-west converter capacity (Wikipedia)
This is a directional grid-risk screen, not a credit rating, and not investment, engineering or procurement advice.
The formatted, cited Grid Risk Annex export is an Analyst Desk feature.See the Grid Exposure Monitor →
Sub-region rating. Part of the Japan national overview.

The five pillars behind the tier

A
A
C
M
C
The pillar signature: Access, Availability, Cost, Momentum, Carbon, taller is stronger. The same shape repeats across every market so peers compare at a glance.
Access30%55

Constrained access on a tight island grid; Tokyo/Inzai is the eastern demand centre.

Availability25%48

Tighter availability: first-ever power shortage warnings in 2022 (cold, low solar, post-quake shutdowns), with the large Kashiwazaki-Kariwa restart still pending.

Cost25%22

Highest cost: eastern-area wholesale runs above the west given the tighter balance.

Momentum15%78

Highest momentum: Tokyo anchors the eastern data-center cluster.

Carbon5%30

Higher carbon: more LNG and coal, less nuclear online than the west.

Default weights, which lean toward cost and access rather than carbon: Access 30 · Availability 25 · Cost 25 · Momentum 15 · Carbon 5. Momentum reflects the data-center build already underway, not just stated intentions.
Seller view: Read these the other way: momentum is your customer pipeline, cost is your revenue ceiling, and access is how hard it is to build and sell here, not only to connect.

Reliability overlay

Reliability adjustment: the five-pillar score of 47 is reduced to 40, a deduction of 7 points, reflecting the delivery-reliability and firm-supply risks flagged below. Reliability is reported as five separate layers, never as one combined label, because they answer different questions and a strong answer on one does not cover a gap in another: what has actually failed on the bulk system, what a forward assessment expects of firm supply, how the local network performs, what your contract actually promises, and what your site is designed to ride through. Any one of them can cap the tier.

Historical bulk-system performance: No reliability flags found

Historical utility-territory delivery performance: No reliability flags found

Average customer interruption (SAIDI) of 24 minutes per year in FY2024, excluding major event days as filed.

measured · Japan OCCTO quality of supply

A blend, not your supplier. This figure covers several distribution operators, so it describes an average customer rather than the operator that would serve your site. It is good for comparing markets and watching them move, it tops out at Comparable (M2), and it cannot carry a Project Case. national average across Japan's regional utilities. It is a territory-wide history and is silent on: performance at a specific substation or feeder; transmission-level service, which is a different product from distribution service; the industrial or large-load customer class specifically; N-1 or other redundancy architecture at the supplying substation; contractual curtailment rights the utility may hold over the load; power quality and momentary interruptions, which this metric excludes by construction; on-site UPS, storage or generation; forward adequacy: it is a record of what happened, not a forecast.

Forward resource adequacy (assessed): Tight

The 50Hz east is structurally tight: it issued Japan's first-ever power shortage warnings in 2022, big eastern nuclear (Kashiwazaki-Kariwa) is still returning, and only about 1.2 GW of frequency converters (rising toward 3 GW by 2027) link it to the western surplus, so the east cannot freely borrow firm capacity from the west.

What this means: A large new load should expect genuine exposure to forced power cuts (curtailment), price spikes, and delays in getting connected, and should design in backup power or firm supply contracts.

event-based · Tokyo first-ever power shortage warning 2022 (Nippon.com) · Japan east-west converter capacity (Wikipedia)

Contractual service terms: not assessed

We have not compiled what firm service actually promises here: whether it is firm, non-firm or interruptible, the conditions under which you can be curtailed, the redundancy required of you, and the transfer time behind any N-1 commitment. Treat this as an open diligence item, not as an indication that service is firm.

Ask the utility for the tariff or service agreement terms before relying on firm supply.

Designed site resilience: not applicable at market level

Utility feeds, UPS, storage, on-site generation, islanding, black start and the residual energy you still expect to lose are properties of a specific site design, not of a market. This layer only exists once there is a site, and we never assert it for you.

Confidence: Med-High. Each input is labelled as measured, modelled, or drawn from a specific event, and is framed as a risk to a prospective large new load, not as a verdict on any utility or grid operator. Forward adequacy is an assessment of what is expected, not a measurement of what has happened; it is a forecast and is labelled as one.
Seller view: Tight forward capacity (firm supply promised for future years) is scarcity that firm generation and storage get paid for; an adequacy flag is a demand signal for new supply, not only a risk to a load.

Supply relief outlook

Will the power crunch ease before your load energizes? This nets the demand racing for capacity against the new supply likely to arrive and the old supply leaving. A cross-side read, using the same data a seller sees the other way.
Tightening
Demand pressure
Fast load growth competing for the same capacity.
Future firm supply
Future firm supply: tight.

What this means: The supply picture looks likely to tighten; a new load should lock firm supply early and expect competition for capacity.

Reliability metrics

Delivery reliability (measured)

The average customer loses about 24.0 minutes of power per year (FY2024). This is the standard regulator outage measure (SAIDI); lower means a more reliable grid.

Averaged across several territories. No single customer experiences this figure. The per-territory table in the reliability overlay above gives each operator’s own filed record, which is what a site-specific read needs.

Source: Japan OCCTO quality of supply

Hard, cited measures behind the reliability overlay above: the regulator outage series (SAIDI, measured, published with a lag) and the forward resource-adequacy assessment (a measured forecast). Framed as risk to a prospective large new load, not a verdict on any utility.

Connection friction

How hard it is to connect a large new load here, and how long it takes. Part of the PowerGridIQ Connection Friction Feed. Labelled measured; confidence Med-High.

Friction level

Severe

This market's friction level, wait band and full story are free here. The precise typical wait in months, and every market ranked side by side, are the Analyst Desk.

Inner-Tokyo power connections run 5 to 10 years; the 66kV network and substation build are the bottleneck.

Power connections in inner Tokyo take about 5 to 10 years, and reports from Chiba cite a 10-year wait as the capacity limits of TEPCO's 66kV network plus substation and transmission construction exceed the building timeline. Transmission-connection applications reached about 15 GW at end-FY2025, up 20 percent year on year. TEPCO Power Grid has said it aims to halve data-centre connection lead times, the main forward watch item.

What builds the 90-month wait

12
18
42
18
Application & capacity study12 mo
Grid connection study & offer18 mo
Substation & network reinforcement42 mo
Construction & energization18 mo
Typical time to energization90 months
How the typical connection wait breaks down by stage. Stages overlap in practice and vary by project; the split is our estimate anchored to the operator process, and the total is the representative time to energization. Anchored to the operator process (Shulman Advisory: TEPCO PG connection lead time).

Data-center share of demand pressure: Very high. Sources: Introl: Japan data-center power crisis · Shulman Advisory: TEPCO PG halving connection lead time. The full cross-market connection dataset is available through the Connection Friction Feed.

Seller view: Connection difficulty is both your own time-to-revenue and a barrier limiting competing supply from reaching this market.

Realized cost band

What a large electricity user pays for power here on one declared case, 100 MW contracted demand, 95% load factor, HV service, per megawatt-hour. Not the wholesale price and not the sticker tariff: energy plus the grid, delivery and other charges that land on the bill. It is a range, because real contracts vary, and it is labelled by how it was built.

Recurring cost, delivered

$135 to $190 per MWh

Midpoint about $160 per MWh

How this band was built

modelled

From 2 public fragments

What builds the $160 midpoint

Illustrative allocation of the compiled midpoint. Component lines are not separately sourced and should not be interpreted as observed tariff charges.
$112
$30
Generation (LNG-heavy)$112
Transmission & distribution$30
Fuel-cost adjustment & renewable levy$18
All-in delivered$160 /MWh
How the $160/MWh figure is built up, component by component, for 100 MW contracted demand, 95% load factor, HV service. The allocation is our estimate; the total is the midpoint of the compiled band (modelled). Recurring cost only: customer-funded connection capital is a separate one-off and is not included. Japan's power is among the most expensive in the OECD because it leans on imported LNG, and the monthly fuel-cost adjustment moves the bill. A large high-voltage data-centre contract sits below the small-business rate but well above US levels. Anchored to published figures (Japan business electricity price (GlobalPetrolPrices, Dec 2025)). How this is built →

Where the cost lands

$160
Low $135Midpoint $160High $190
A band, not a single price: the cheaper end is a well-structured contract on favourable terms, the higher end a less optimised one. The midpoint is our best central read.
What is in the number: LNG-heavy generation plus transmission and distribution, the monthly fuel-cost adjustment and the renewable-energy levy. Japan has no US-style capacity market; cost is driven by imported fuel.

Tokyo is one of the world's largest data-center markets, but Japan's reliance on imported LNG makes delivered power among the most expensive in the coverage. A large high-voltage load negotiates a special contract below the roughly 28 yen per kWh small-business rate, but still well above US or Nordic levels, and the monthly fuel-cost adjustment adds volatility.

This market's band is free here; the ranked cross-market table with every market's precise midpoint is the Analyst Desk. See the ranked view.

Basis: triangulated from public sources, in US dollars per MWh delivered to a large high-load-factor load, excluding refundable taxes. Sources: Japan business electricity price (GlobalPetrolPrices) · TEPCO fuel cost adjustments (2026).

Seller view: This delivered price is the level a competitive supply offer must beat, and the revenue ceiling a merchant plant works against here.

Data provenance and freshness

What we hold for this market, field by field. Each tier below is assigned from the evidence actually held for that field, with provenance. A low tier means we looked and it is thin; it is not a verdict on the market.
cost: M1connection: M2reliability: M2carbon: M2regulatory: not_assessedlocal capacity: not_assessed
Against a Standardized Project Case, the binding field is cost, connection, reliability. That is what a standardized case would turn on here; a readiness result for your own project depends on your own requirements, siting and utility, which this market-level read does not know.
Read against other uses: Discovery and monitoring: M1 · Market comparison: M1 · Project Case with a carbon requirement: M1 · Conditional site diligence: insufficient.
Depth is not a rating strength, a confidence score or a feasibility conclusion. An aggregate is only ever shown for a named use case, and equals the lowest tier across that use case's required fields. Definitions v1.0. See the full coverage matrix.
How solid the data behind this rating is, on two separate axes plus recency. Source reliability is how measured the numbers are, as opposed to triangulated or modelled. Coverage is how many of the decision-relevant data dimensions (reliability, connection, and cost) are compiled for this market. The two are kept apart because they answer different questions: a market can have strong sources on the little that is covered, or broad coverage that still leans on models. Neither grades the rating itself. The rating is a cited opinion, graded separately and falsifiably by the public track record and baseline measurement plan.

Source reliability

Moderate

2 of 3 data layers measured

Coverage

Full

3 of 3 dimensions: reliability, connection, cost

Last reviewed

June 2026

per-layer vintages below

LayerMethodVintageFreshnessSource
PGIQ Rating opinionopinionJune 2026CurrentPGIQ methodology
ReliabilitymeasuredFY2024FreshJapan OCCTO quality of supply
Connection frictionmeasured2025/26FreshIntrol: Japan data-center power crisis
Realized costmodelled2026FreshJapan business electricity price (GlobalPetrolPrices)

Freshness reflects each layer's refresh cadence: reliability annual to three-yearly, capacity-auction and queue yearly, tariffs every year or two. The full cross-market freshness dashboard is at /data-quality.

What this market can and cannot answer yet

No market-level read closes a project case on its own, and saying only that would waste the evidence we do hold. Below is what is established, what is open, and what to do next.

What is established

  • Recurring cost band $135 to $190 per MWh, midpoint $160, basis modelled, against the 100 MW archetype
  • Historical utility-territory delivery performance 24.0 minutes per year (FY2024)
  • Forward resource adequacy (assessed)

What is open

  • Historical bulk-system performance
  • Contractual service terms (would change the answer)
  • Designed site resilience
  • regulatory evidence
  • local_capacity evidence

How service and connection are organized

Not compiled for this market. Identify the serving operator before relying on any figure here, because a market-level read is an average over territories.
How the connection process is organised: the applicable service and connection entities depend on the candidate location and the power pathway. We have not compiled the structure for this market; that is a gap in our wayfinding, not a fact about the market.

Credible ranges today

  • Cost $135 to $190 per MWh, midpoint $160 (modelled)

What could disqualify this market

  • Structural isolation from the western surplus (about 1.2 GW of converters today).
  • Slow nuclear restart in the east.

Outlook drivers

↑ Upgrade triggers

  • Kashiwazaki-Kariwa and other restarts ease the eastern balance.
  • Frequency-converter capacity to the west rises toward 3 GW by 2027.

↓ Downgrade triggers

  • Restart delays keep the east tight.
  • Cold snaps or low solar trigger fresh shortage warnings.

Scheduled to change

Dated, already-announced events that will affect a large load sited here, in date order. These are published facts with sources, not our forecasts, and they matter most when your energization date is years out.
By 2027
Frequency-converter capacity between the 50Hz east and 60Hz west rises toward 3 GW
Lets the tight eastern grid draw more on the western surplus, easing the Tokyo-area balance.
Japan east-west converter capacity (Wikipedia)

Key risks

Peer comparison

Trades like
constrained pricey hubs
Ahead of
western Japan on revealed build
Behind
western Japan on availability and carbon

Evidence behind this rating

The real-world events that test our Tier 4 call for Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz): 1 supports it and 1 challenges it. Each is dated and cited, so you can check the rating against what is actually happening on the ground.

Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Unit 6 restarts: TEPCO's first reactor back since 2011, 1,356 MWIN SERVICE ✓ Supports the rating
Feb 2026AvailabilityMateriality: high

Japan restarted Unit 6 of Kashiwazaki-Kariwa, its largest nuclear station, on 9 Feb 2026, reaching full operation around mid-March. It is TEPCO's first reactor to resume after the post-2011 shutdowns, and adds roughly 9,500 GWh a year of firm, non-emitting generation to the 50Hz eastern system that Tokyo loads sit on. Japan now has 15 operating reactors totalling 33 GW. FOLLOW-THROUGH, NOT PROMISE: this one is delivering. The caution sits next door, where TEPCO has pushed Unit 7 (another 1,356 MW) back to 2029 or 2030, and where national policy assumes up to 30 reactors running by FY2040 against 15 today, 3 approved, 6 under review and 8 that have not applied.

Power to a buyer: Real electrons, now. 1,356 MW back on the TEPCO system since 9 Feb 2026, about 9,500 GWh a year. This is the rare case where the announcement and the delivery are the same event.
Source: US Energy Information Administration ↗
Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Unit 7 restart pushed to 2029-2030ANNOUNCED ▲ Challenges the rating
Feb 2026AvailabilityMateriality: med

TEPCO has delayed the restart of Unit 7, a second 1,356 MW reactor at the same station, to 2029 or 2030. Recorded separately from the Unit 6 restart because the two are routinely reported together as one recovery story, and they are not: one is generating and one is a date that has already moved. Japan's FY2040 policy target of about 20 per cent nuclear needs up to 30 reactors operating against 15 today.

Power to a buyer: Nothing before 2029 at the earliest, and only if the restart programme holds. Unit 7 is 1,356 MW deferred, not cancelled.
Source: US Energy Information Administration ↗
Cited, dated developments tagged to the pillar they bear on, and whether they support or challenge the current tier. A material item flags the market for analyst review and may drive a rating action.
🔔 Get alerts for Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz)
Be notified the moment this market's PGIQ Rating, outlook, or a material development changes. Free while we validate demand.

Rating history

June 2026
New ratingNew rating: Tier 4 Constrained assigned (eastern 50Hz grid).
🔒 The full time series behind Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz), how its score, recurring cost, and interconnection queue (the line to connect to the grid) have moved month by month, is part of the Analyst Desk. The rating actions above are always free.
Every rating action is dated and explained, and the log is only ever added to, never edited. Reviews happen on a regular schedule and whenever a significant event occurs. "Affirmed" means we reviewed a development and the tier held; "Under review" means a significant item is being assessed and the rating could change.

Score history

How Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz)'s reliability-adjusted score and tier have moved, month by month. Part of your Analyst Desk.

Immutable monthly snapshots of the reliability-adjusted score, tier, outlook and recurring cost, oldest first. Dated when taken and never back-filled, so the series only compounds forward. Part of the Analyst Desk →

Grid conditions now

Structural baseline, June 2026Open the live map for Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz) →
System context, not a Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz) measurement. Japan system conditions, shown as context for Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz). This is not a measurement specific to Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz). Zonal price, local network margin and interchange are not available at this scope.
Demand
50,000 MW
Structural baseline, June 2026
System demand across the market.
Wholesale price
not available at this scope
Zonal or local. The parent system value would be a different quantity, not a coarser one.
Carbon intensity
450 g/kWh
Structural baseline, June 2026
Derived from the fuel mix. Never directly measured.
Low-carbon share
27%
Structural baseline, June 2026
Wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, biofuel and nuclear. The emissions-free share of generation, which is the read for a carbon target.
Renewable share
22%
Structural baseline, June 2026
Wind, solar, hydro, geothermal and biofuel. Excludes nuclear, which is low-carbon but not renewable, so this is the read for an RE100-style renewable procurement mandate.
Installed capacity
92,000 MW
Structural baseline, June 2026
Firm capacity
not available at this scope
Zonal or local. The parent system value would be a different quantity, not a coarser one.
System firm margin
not available at this scope
Zonal or local. The parent system value would be a different quantity, not a coarser one.
Imports
not available at this scope
Zonal or local. The parent system value would be a different quantity, not a coarser one.
Exports
not available at this scope
Zonal or local. The parent system value would be a different quantity, not a coarser one.

Every field above carries its own source and freshness. Price, imports and exports are modelled in every market because no feed supplies them. Carbon intensity is derived from the fuel mix.

What next for Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz)?

Add to shortlistTrack it alongside your other candidates.Compare with peersRank markets against each other on your own weights.Open the Analyst DeskEvery market side by side, with history and alerts.Retrieve it through the APIThe same read as JSON, with provenance on every field.

Done with Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz)? Browse every market or see conditions across every region.

How does Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz) compare to every other market?

This page is our full read on Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz) alone, and it is free. To decide where a large load should actually go, you need every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the history and alerts when your shortlist moves. That is the Analyst Desk.

With your Analyst Desk, compare Japan East (Tokyo, 50Hz) against every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the full history and shortlist alerts.

+ Add to your shortlist Recurring cost, ranked Connection friction, ranked Get the Analyst Desk →