Would China’s power industry benefit from nationwide carbon emission permit trading? An optimization model-based ex post analysis on abatement cost savings

Xian, Yujiao; Wang, Ke; Wei, Yi‐Ming; Huang, Zhimin

doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.11.011

Cited by 55 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The cement and power industries with relatively low cost of emission reduction, can maximize profits by selling large amounts of quotas. In contrast, iron and steel industry with high carbon emission reduction costs must purchase a large number of quotas (Wang et al, 2015;Xian et al, 2019).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Emission Trading Improve Carbon Emission Efficiency of China’s Iron and Steel Industry? An Exploration Using a DEA-SBM and Difference-In-Differences Approach

Wang

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As an effective tool of carbon emission reduction, emission trading has been widely used in many countries. Since 2013, China implemented carbon emission trading in seven provinces and cities, with iron and steel industry included in the first batch of pilot industries. This study attempts to explore the policy effect of emission trading on iron and steel industry in order to provide data and theoretical support for the low-carbon development of iron and steel industry as well as the optimization of carbon market. With panel data of China’s 29 provinces from 2006 to 2017, this study adopted a DEA-SBM model to measure carbon emission efficiency of China’s iron and steel industry (CEI) and a difference-in-differences (DID) method to explore the impact of emission trading on CEI. Moreover, regional heterogeneity and influencing mechanisms were further investigated, respectively. The results indicate that: (1) China's emission trading has a significant and sustained effect on carbon abatement of iron and steel industry, increasing the annual average CEI by 12.6% in pilot provinces. (2) The policy effects are heterogeneous across diverse regions. Higher impacts are found in the western and eastern regions, whereas the central region is not significant. (3) Emission trading improves CEI by stimulating technology innovation, reducing energy intensity, and adjusting energy structure. (4) Economic level and industrial structure are negatively related to CEI, while environmental governance and openness degree have no obvious impacts. Finally, according to the results and conclusions, some specific suggestions are proposed.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Emission Trading Improve Carbon Emission Efficiency of China’s Iron and Steel Industry? An Exploration Using a DEA-SBM and Difference-In-Differences Approach

Wang

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Table 1 lists some previous studies on the CO 2 shadow price of industrial sectors. Most of them focus on the CO 2 shadow price in a single sector, such as power plants [35][36][37][38][39] or construction sector [8,40]. Some others focus on several sectors [41,42].…”

Section: ] the Estimation Of Marginal Abatement Cost (Mac)mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Empirical Study on the Shadow Price of Carbon Dioxide Emissions in China’s Industry

Wu¹,

Zhang²,

Zhang³

et al. 2020

Pol. J. Environ. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Paris Conference holds great significance in terms of establishing a legally binding and global agreement on climate change with the aim of keeping global warming below 2ºC above preindustrial levels [1]. However, as one of the largest economies in the world, China is the biggest emitter worthy of the name and its annual growth of emissions has been more than the sum of North America and Europe [2]. As a responsible country, China has committed to reducing CO 2 emissions per unit of GDP (i.e., carbon intensity) by 40-45% by 2020 compared to 2005 [3]. Furthermore, in the Paris Climate Conference, China's government pledged to peak its CO 2 emissions no later than 2030 [4] and further reduce carbon intensity by 60-65% of the 2005 level [5, 6]. Determining how large the economic sacrifice will be for achieving the upper goals has attracted increasing attention in recent literature [7,

show abstract

“…Färe et al (2013Färe et al ( , 2014 employ the framework to calculate the maximum production of electricity for the US coal burning power plants for the period 1995 -2005, with observed level of bad outputs, under three different policy scenarios i.e., CAC, spatial trading, and spatial and temporal trading, to demonstrate the unrealized gains from foregone trading under the existing regulatory trading system. 3 Following Färe et al (2013Färe et al ( , 2014, recent studies have attempted to estimate the gains of foregone emission trading in China (e.g., Xian et al, 2019) Studies, estimating opportunity cost of carbon mitigation in India, are limited. To our knowledge, only two studies have estimated the shadow prices of CO2 emissions (Gupta, 2006;Jain and Kumar, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CO2 mitigation policy for Indian thermal power sector: Potential gains from emission trading

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study shows potential cost savings by adoption of emission trading in India. At the Paris Agreement, India pledged to reduce CO2 emissions intensity by about 30-35 percent by 2030 relative to 2005. Applying joint production function of electricity and CO2 emissions, we find that India could have saved about US$ 5 to 8 billion, if she had constituted an emission trading system, with the provision of banking and borrowing over the study period of 5 years. To our knowledge, this is the first study measuring foregone gains due to absence of a nationwide carbon emission-trading program in coal fired thermal power sector, using an ex-post analysis.

show abstract

Would China’s power industry benefit from nationwide carbon emission permit trading? An optimization model-based ex post analysis on abatement cost savings

Abstract: China's power industry benefit from nationwide carbon emission permit trading? An optimization model-based ex post analysis on abatement cost savings. CEEP-BIT Working Paper.

Cited by 55 publications

References 49 publications

Does Emission Trading Improve Carbon Emission Efficiency of China’s Iron and Steel Industry? An Exploration Using a DEA-SBM and Difference-In-Differences Approach

Does Emission Trading Improve Carbon Emission Efficiency of China’s Iron and Steel Industry? An Exploration Using a DEA-SBM and Difference-In-Differences Approach

An Empirical Study on the Shadow Price of Carbon Dioxide Emissions in China’s Industry

CO2 mitigation policy for Indian thermal power sector: Potential gains from emission trading

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About