4.7 Article

Allocation and simulation study of carbon emission quotas among China's provinces in 2020

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 24, Issue 8, Pages 7088-7113

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-016-8360-z

Keywords

Carbonemission allocation; Provinces; Indicator system; Scenario classification

Funding

  1. education sector of Jiangsu Province Graduate student education innovation project [KYZZ15_0375]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

China will form its carbon market in 2017 to focus on the allocation of regional carbon emission quota in order to cope with global warming. The rationality of the regional allocation has become an important consideration for the government in ensuring stable growth in different regions that are experiencing disparity in resource endowment and economic status. Based on constructing the quota allocation indicator system for carbon emission, the emission quota for each province in different scenarios and schemes in 2020 is simulated by the multifactor hybrid weighted Shannon entropy allocation model. The following conclusions are drawn: (1) The top 5 secondary-level indicators that influence provincial quota allocation in weight are as follows: per capita energy consumption, openness, per capita carbon emission, per capita disposable income, and energy intensity. (2) The ratio of carbon emission in 2020 is different from that in 2013 in many scenarios, and the variation is scenario 2 > scenario 1 > scenario 3, with Hubei and Guangdong the provinces with the largest increase and decrease ratios, respectively. (3) In the same scenario, the quota allocation varies in different reduction criteria emphases; if the government emphasizes reduction efficiency, scheme 1 will show obvious adjustment, that is, Hunan, Hubei, Guizhou, and Yunnan will have the largest decrease. The amounts are 4.28, 8.31, 4.04, and 5.97 million tons, respectively.

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