Natural Hazards

, Volume 86, Issue 3, pp 1333–1345 | Cite as

China’s energy demand and carbon dioxide emissions: do carbon emission reduction paths matter?

Original Paper

Abstract

To investigate the impact of carbon emission reduction paths on energy demand and CO2 emissions in China, in this study, quantitative carbon emission reduction paths in the period 2014–2020 are established by decomposing the target for emissions reduction. An optimization model of energy demand, into which reduction paths are incorporated, is then constructed from a goal-oriented perspective. The results suggest that energy consumption varies under different emission reduction paths. Coal demand is found to be much more sensitive to the choice of emission reduction path than other forms of energy; in particular, it responds strongly to the decreasing reduction path. We conclude that the decreasing reduction path is a better means than the increasing reduction path of achieving China’s emission reduction target for 2020 with the least amount of energy and the least amount of CO2 emissions.

Keywords

Energy demand Carbon dioxide emissions Emission reduction path 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71271074, 71573069, 71373099). The authors would like to thank the comments and suggestions from the reviewers.

References

  1. Andersson FNG, Karpestam P (2013) CO2 emissions and economic activity: short- and long-run economic determinants of scale, energy intensity and carbon intensity. Energ Policy 61:1285–1294. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Auffhammer M, Carson RT (2008) Forecasting the path of China’s CO2 emissions using province-level information. J Environ Econ Manag 55(3):229–247. doi: 10.1016/j.jeem.2007.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cao J, Karplus VJ (2014) Firm-level determinants of energy and carbon intensity in China. Energy Policy 75:167–178. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Grunewald N, Jakob M, Mouratiadou I (2014) Decomposing inequality in CO2 emissions: the role of primary energy carriers and economic sectors. Ecol Econ 100:183–194. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.02.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Liu X, Mao G, Ren J, Li RYM, Guo J, Zhang L (2015) How might China achieve its 2020 emissions target? A scenario analysis of energy consumption and CO2 emissions using the system dynamics model. J Clean Prod 103:401–410. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.080 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Nordhaus W (2007) Critical assumptions in the Stern review on climate change. Science 317:201–202. doi: 10.1126/science.1137316 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Olmstead SM, Stavins RN (2006) An international policy architecture for the post-Kyoto era. Am Econ Rev 96(2):35–38. doi: 10.1257/000282806777212413 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Stern NH (2007) The economics of climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Wang R, Liu W, Xiao L, Liu J, Kao W (2011) Path towards achieving of China’s 2020 carbon emission reduction target—a discussion of low-carbon energy policies at province level. Energy Policy 39:2740–2747. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.02.043 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Weitzman ML (2009) On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev Econ Stat 91:1–19. doi: 10.1162/rest.91.1.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Yue T, Long R, Chen H, Zhao X (2013) The optimal CO2 emissions reduction path in Jiangsu province: an expanded IPAT approach. Appl Energy 112:1510–1517. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.02.046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Zhou P, Wang M (2016) Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: a review. Ecol Econ 125:47–59. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.03.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Zhou P, Sun ZR, Zhou DQ (2014) Optimal path for controlling CO2 emissions in China: a perspective of efficiency analysis. Energy Econ 45:99–110. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2014.06.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Zhu B, Wang K, Chevallier J, Wang P, Wei Y-M (2015) Can China achieves its carbon intensity target by 2020 while sustaining economic growth? Ecol Econ 119:209–216. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.08.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiaofei Han
    • 1
  • Jianling Jiao
    • 1
  • Lancui Liu
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Lanlan Li
    • 1
  1. 1.School of ManagementHefei University of TechnologyHefeiPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Business SchoolBeijing Normal UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Center for Climate and Environmental Policy, Chinese Academy of Environmental PlanningMinistry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of ChinaBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.Harvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations