Japan's two incompatible power grids make disaster recovery harder

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


The huge disaster in Japan has ruined parts of the nation's electrical system, notably the six Fukushima Daiichi reactors that remain shut down. As a result, the country's utilities can't generate enough power to meet demand, so they are using rolling blackouts to give some power to everyone for some portion of each day. That tactic is crippling industry—it's hard to run a factory that makes cars or TVs when the power suddenly cuts out for a few hours each day. The blackouts complicate commuting, so workers can't get to their shifts on time, which further cripples manufacturing. And so on.

Incredibly, the southwestern half of Japan, which largely survived the earthquake and tsunami unscathed, cannot help the northeastern half of the nation, which took the brunt of the damage, because the two sections of the country operate on two separate power grids that are incompatible. As NPR reported on March 24, the southwestern section can actually produce surplus power, but the transmission and distribution system there operates at 60 Hertz, and the northeastern region's grid operates at 50 Hz. This awkward situation, seen clearly on the Japanese map above (blue is 60 Hz, red is 50 Hz), is the legacy of a historic oddity: the "east," as it's referred to in Japan, built its grid based on the German 50 Hz system, and the "west" followed the American 60 Hz system. (An English adaptation of a similar map is here.)

Converting power from one system to the other is a complex task that requires enormous yet highly sensitive machinery. The country has only a few, meager "interconnect" facilities that can do the job, which have nowhere near the capacity to minimize the need for rolling blackouts.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The U.S. has a less dramatic but similarly tenuous setup. The nation is divided into three grids. All three operate at 60 Hz, but again, only a few interconnects exist between the regions. Those sites would have to be beefed up significantly if the country was to benefit from building massive wind farms in the windy high plains or big solar farms in the sunny southwest. More and larger interconnects would also allow regions to "wheel" large quantifies of power between them, to help minimize blackouts caused by storms. Better interconnects would also help utilities that might be in danger of exceeding their capacity (say, Texas, buckling under heavy air conditioning load in August) to get some extra power from another region that has some to spare (perhaps cool Minnesota on that same day).

Map courtesy of Tosaka, via WikiMedia Commons

Mark Fischetti was a senior editor at Scientific American for nearly 20 years and covered sustainability issues, including climate, environment, energy, and more. He assigned and edited feature articles and news by journalists and scientists and also wrote in those formats. He was founding managing editor of two spin-off magazines: Scientific American Mind and Scientific American Earth 3.0. His 2001 article “Drowning New Orleans” predicted the widespread disaster that a storm like Hurricane Katrina would impose on the city. Fischetti has written as a freelancer for the New York Times, Sports Illustrated, Smithsonian and many other outlets. He co-authored the book Weaving the Web with Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, which tells the real story of how the Web was created. He also co-authored The New Killer Diseases with microbiologist Elinor Levy. Fischetti has a physics degree and has twice served as Attaway Fellow in Civic Culture at Centenary College of Louisiana, which awarded him an honorary doctorate. In 2021 he received the American Geophysical Union’s Robert C. Cowen Award for Sustained Achievement in Science Journalism. He has appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press, CNN, the History Channel, NPR News and many radio stations.

More by Mark Fischetti

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe