Goal and technology path of CO2 mitigation in China's cement industry: from the perspective of co-benefit

Tan, Qilu; Wen, Zongguo; Chen, Jining

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.148

Cited by 48 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A case study was conducted to test the applicability and effectiveness of the model so that valuable policy implications were developed, implemented and monitored. Tan et al (2015) established a bottom-up optimization model to evaluate the co-benefits and technology paths of all types of cement production technologies. Based upon the investigation of the evolution of co-benefits, they suggested that it is crucial to invest more effort in promoting applications of more cost-effective technologies, especially of those with relatively lower penetration rates, so that CO 2 mitigation goals for cement sector can be achieved.…”

Section: Tools and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent progress on innovative eco-industrial development

Geng

Fujita

Park

et al. 2016

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Tools and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent progress on innovative eco-industrial development

Geng

Fujita

Park

et al. 2016

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Other articles quantify particle levels without linkages to quantified health improvements (Braspenning Radu et al, 2016;Rao et al, 2016;Singh, Strømman, & Hertwich, 2012). Several estimations concern air pollution in Asia (Dhar & Shukla, 2015;Dhar, Pathak, & Shukla, 2017;Tan, Wen, & Chen, 2016;Yang & Teng, 2018;Zhang, Worrell, & Crijns-Graus, 2015;Zhao, Ma, Dong, & Jiang, 2017). According to van Vliet et al (2012), improved outdoor air quality could save up to 1.82 million lives annually in Asia.…”

Section: Quantified Health Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate policy co-benefits: a review

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concern over mitigation costs impedes the adoption of the climate policies needed to achieve agreed global warming targets. While costs are important to consider, so are benefits. However, the evidence for climate policy co-benefits, that is, the benefits in addition to avoided climate change costs, is commonly overlooked in policy-making. In many areas, the research is limited and not comprehensively synthesised. This article counters that problem and reviews 239 peer-reviewed articles, selected from 1,749 hits from a literature search covering 'co-benefits' and related terms. Aiming to aid policy-makers and to identify research gaps, we structure, describe, analyse and synthesize the rapidly expanding knowledge on climate policy co-benefits. Improved air quality is the co-benefit category dominating the literature, but studies covering a broad geographic range also focus on diet, physical activity, soil and water quality, biodiversity, economic performance, and energy security. In these areas, co-benefits are shown to be of substantial economic value, regarding air quality often of the same order of magnitude as mitigation costs, in some instances even larger. However, the share of studies quantifying or monetizing cobenefits is limited, and the empirical evidence is small, in particular for areas besides air quality and health. Furthermore, the knowledge is seldom used in policy-making, meaning that decision-making is often biased and overly concerned with costs, leading to suboptimal climate policies and goal failures. Evidently, more research is needed, as well as improved decision-making. Understanding and acting on climate policy co-benefits can promote policies that better mitigate climate change and improve overall welfare. Key policy insights. Climate policy co-benefits in well-researched fields such as air quality and health are large, often equalling or exceeding mitigation costs. . Despite their significance, co-benefits are seldom considered in decision-making, leading to biased policies and goal failures. . In several areas, such as diet and energy security, co-benefits are sparsely researched, but emerging evidence points to high values. . More research is needed, including on how to describe the total value of different co-benefits. . Improved processes, documentation requirements and criteria in decision-making are needed, in order to ensure that political decision-makers consider co-benefits. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…Moreover, some bottom-up studies can also use models based on complex technologies (e.g., Long-range Energy Alternatives Planning System (LEAP) model) to evaluate industrial and regional co-benefits [45,46]. Inevitably, fossil fuel consumption will lead to certain amounts of air pollution and CO 2 emissions [47,48], and it is now recognized that energy saving and air pollution control measures can have co-benefits in terms of cutting air pollutants and carbon emissions [49,50]. Therefore, understanding the synergy and co-effects of air pollutant and GHG emission reduction measures is an interesting research topic [51,52].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Co-Effects on Air Pollutants and CO2 Emissions Generated by End-of-Pipe Measures of Pollution Control in China’s Coal-Fired Power Plants

Zhao

Dong

et al. 2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:China is now facing great challenges resulting from climate change and air pollution, driven by the processes of industrialization and urbanization. Greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions produced by the coal-fired power industry represent approximately 70% of the total emissions in China's industrial sector. In this study, 39 coal-fired power plants built in China between 2014 and 2015 were analyzed in regards to the co-effects oncarbon dioxide and air pollutant emissions generated directly and indirectly by end-of-pipe measures of pollution control. After completing the quantitative analysis with input data from 83units of power plants, we found that co-effects were positive only for air pollutant reductions through the implementation of desulfurization, denitrification, and dedusting measures, but co-effects were negative for carbon dioxide production because of the corresponding electricity use and chemical reactions that led to the increases in carbon dioxide emissions. We also performed an assessment of the synergistic coefficients to better understand the degree of co-effects. It will be important for researchers to take a comprehensive view of China's coal-fired power plants and look for solutions that can maximize positive co-effects and achieve overall co-benefits of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants.

show abstract

Goal and technology path of CO2 mitigation in China's cement industry: from the perspective of co-benefit

Cited by 48 publications

References 30 publications

Recent progress on innovative eco-industrial development

Recent progress on innovative eco-industrial development

Climate policy co-benefits: a review

Analysis of Co-Effects on Air Pollutants and CO2 Emissions Generated by End-of-Pipe Measures of Pollution Control in China’s Coal-Fired Power Plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About