4.8 Article

Evaluating CO2 emission performance in China's cement industry: An enterprise perspective

Journal

APPLIED ENERGY
Volume 166, Issue -, Pages 191-200

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.11.006

Keywords

Cement facilities; CO2 emissions; Spatial distribution; Ownership; China

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41101500, 71461137008, 71325006, 71311140172]
  2. 12th five-year plan support program Development and application of building functional materials for villages and small towns' buildings

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper targets to evaluate the overall CO2 emissions from cement industry based on the detailed information of China's total 1574 cement enterprises in 2013. State-owned enterprises and large scale enterprises dominate the total CO2 emissions, accounting for 59.35% and 61.87% of the total emissions respectively. The process emission intensities of all enterprises ranged among 500-600 kg CO2/t clinker, while the energy emission intensities varied among different enterprises, with an average level of 348 kg CO2/t clinker and a standard deviation of 233 kg CO2/t clinker. The average CO2 emissions performance of China's cement enterprises (806 kg CO2/t clinker) is 35 kg CO2/t clinker lower than the global level in 2013. The CO2 emissions intensity of the best 20th clinker production, which is lower than the IEA's 2020 target, could be the entry threshold for future new enterprises and top runner bench mark for the existing enterprises. The Yangtze River Delta region is the most important hotspot of the cement CO2 emissions. Wuhu & Tongling are the hottest emission centers, with an average of 8288 ton of CO2 emissions per square kilometers. Ownership of cement enterprises should be carefully considered in the policy preparation. Favorable policies could focus on medium sized facilities and facilities in the ENDI type along the Silk Road Economic Belt. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available