| JRC began aggregate calculation of environmental accounting in 2001 and is working to achieve efficiency in its environmental activities in terms of both cost and effect.
1. Accounting conditions
- Period covered: April 1, 2008 - March 31, 2009
- Range of accounting: Japan Radio Co., Ltd. Mitaka Plant and Saitama Plant
- Basic concepts: Guidelines for Environmental Accounting, 2005 edition (Ministry of the Environment)
- Only costs of the measures taken for the purpose of environmental conservation should be included in the accounting.
- Depreciation costs of environmental facilities are included.
- Only substantial impacts (reduction impacts, income from selling valuable resources) should be included, but estimated impacts should not be included.
- The effect shown in terms of the consumption of electric power, city gas, drinking water supply and water from wells should cover not only the facility investment but all environmental activities.
2. Environmental conservation costs
Unit: Million yen
| Classification |
Efforts |
FY 2008 |
| Investment |
Costs |
| 1. Costs in business areas |
Cost of waste disposal
Maintenance and management costs of facilities to reduce environmental loads |
20.8 |
187.8 |
| 2. Up- and down-stream costs |
Recycling cost |
0 |
0.5 |
| 3. Management activity cost |
Personnel cost of environmental control
Maintenance cost of environmental management systems |
0 |
93.0 |
| 4. Research and development cost |
Research and development cost for environmentally conscious design product |
0 |
722.6 |
| 5. Costs of social activities |
Environmental maintenance cost, including vegetation
The cost of publicity |
0 |
12.9 |
| 6. Cost of environmental damage |
Cost of restoring natural environments |
0 |
0 |
| Total |
20.8 |
1,016.8 |
3. Effects
| Economic effects Unit: Million yen |
|
| Contents of effect |
2008 |
| Quantitative effect |
Economic effect |
| 1. Reduction of power (1,000 Kwh) |
865.8 |
-35.1 |
| 2. Reduction of city gas (1,000m³) |
28.9 |
-3.7 |
| 3. Reduction of consumption of tap water and well water (1,000m³) |
-1.6 |
-1.9 |
| 4. Heavy oil (1,000L) |
31.6 |
4.9 |
5.Resources recycling and reduction of wastes
| (1)Industrial waste subject to special control |
|
(1,000kg) |
|
(1,000L) |
| (2)Industrial waste |
|
(1,000kg) |
|
(1,000L) |
| (3)General waste from business activities |
|
(1,000kg) |
|
|
|
| 6. Valuable resources (1,000kg) |
393.4 |
16.4 |
| 7. Kitchen waste, Can (1,000kg) |
-9.5 |
0.3 |
| Total |
－ |
-16.0 |
* All values except the actual values of valuable resource show the difference from actual values of the previous fiscal year. |
 |
4. Report of results
(1) Environmental conservation cost
Though the costs in the business areas have decreased by approx. 10% compared with that of the previous fiscal year, the cost of management activity and research and development was about the same as the previous fiscal year. Consequently, the total cost has declined slightly compared with the previous fiscal year.
(2) Effect
The quantitative effect has been substantially reduced for electric power and slightly reduced for city gas. The volume of industrial waste subject to special control has been reduced by recycling solvents, and so on. Though the volume of construction waste as industrial waste was substantially reduced and the volume of wasted fluorescent tubes and dry cells was slightly reduced, the amount of wasted batteries has increased substantially.
Though the economic effect of waste remains positive on a continual basis, specifically, the effect on electric power has been substantially reduced due to the sharp rise in oil prices. For valuable resources (aluminum scrap, copper scrap, steel scrap and gold plating, etc.), however, the purchase volume has declined by about 10% compared to the level of the previous fiscal year and the purchase cash equivalent has declined by about 25% due to the price slump in the metal market. Consequently, the total economic effect has become negative, despite being positive the previous fiscal year. |
