Dynamic wireless charging economics, the JC-STAR★1 grid-code consultation, Japan's FIT/FIP solar support phase-out, a think-tank review, fuel vs battery, and the EU 2035 CO₂ rule. Each topic links to the video and to the article that holds the sources and calculations.
Each video condenses a topic into 7–9 minutes; the assumptions, calculations, and sources live in the linked article. Where the article exists only in Japanese, the link opens an automatically translated view. Japanese and Chinese editions of this roundup follow the same order.
This roundup in other languages: 日本語 简体中文
8 topics · 8 videos ｜ Subscribe for new videos ｜ Watch on this site (all videos)
Public data applied to the Tateyama Expressway dynamic-charging pilot planned from FY2027: even if every large BEV carried a receiver in 2040, 153 vehicles a day would charge, at ¥477/kWh — five times the ¥89 of batteries plus high-power charging.
How to file a public comment on the draft revision of Japan's grid-interconnection technical guideline (e-Gov case 620340012), which would make the JC-STAR★1 label a requirement. Deadline 6 November 2026; three filing routes and a per-issue drafting aid.
A 14-language AI desk, a canary that checks itself every morning, quotes sealed with passkey signatures and Cloud KMS, CSP enforced with zero violations, and self-run OCPP and Modbus services — what an installer builds in-house, where vendor technology begins, and lessons from outages.
New FIT/FIP support for ground-mounted utility solar ends in FY2027, with 'community-coexistence' projects as the only exception. The line is drawn by land ownership and municipal involvement, not by equipment performance or actual impact. Seventeen public questions to METI's Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, and six recurring argument patterns.
Six columns and proposals from Mitsubishi Research Institute — post-FIT, low-voltage aggregation, FIP, grid stability, perovskite, and recycling — checked against primary sources and published figures with the same rigor applied to I-S3's own views. Points of agreement, discrepancies, interests on both sides, and an offer to publish a reply.
Five items that insurance underwriting and lending review cannot learn from a JC-STAR★1 label yet that decide the size of a loss: capacity on one firmware-distribution path, capacity under one administrator credential, fixed minimum operating point and ramp rate, behavior on communication loss, and whether control points are reachable from outside.
A rule that removes a class of products from the grid raises the value of what remains as a target. Public documents show three conditions converging — supplier concentration, the appearance of 'already secured', and a political context — while the label does not examine the highest-value targets: update servers and signing keys.
How much of a cyberattack can a JC-STAR label stop? A technical and quantitative review of AI-enabled attack capability, cloud compromise, IEC 62443 boundary protection, and whether tying the label to the grid code is justified. Where a device was made says nothing about who will attack it.