4.7 Article

Optimal carbon allowance price in China's carbon emission trading system: Perspective from the multi-sectoral marginal abatement cost

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 253, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119945

Keywords

Carbon allowance price; Marginal abatement cost; China'S carbon emissions trading system; Multi-sectors

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71934004, 71573013, 71521002, 71642004]
  2. Beijing Natural Science Foundation of China [9152014]
  3. Special Items Fund for Cultivation and Development of Beijing Creative Base [Z171100002217023]
  4. National Key RD Program [2016YFA0602603]
  5. Special Items Fund of Beijing Municipal Commission of Education

Ask authors/readers for more resources

China's carbon emission trading system (ETS) was officially launched at the end of 2017 to further promote carbon emissions mitigation. In the ETS, the carbon price is the key factor determining whether the emission reduction target can be achieved. The optimal carbon price is the smallest marginal abatement cost that can achieve the emission reduction target. This study simulates the marginal abatement cost curves of different sectors in China's ETS and calculate the optimal carbon price of sector coverage scenarios based on the criteria that involve eight sectors in turn. The results show that the marginal abatement cost decreases with increasing sector involvement. The optimal carbon price to achieve the two intensity targets at the same time is between 345 yuan/ton and 1140 yuan/ton. From the sectoral perspective, the power sector undertakes the largest emission reduction, while the transportation sector is responsible for smaller emission reduction. China's ETS will cause GDP losses from 1.63% to 2.27% compared with the BAU scenario, but it can achieve CO2 reduction from 9.56% to 10.13%. (C) 2020 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available