4.7 Article

Decoupling and attribution analysis of industrial carbon emissions in Taiwan

期刊

ENERGY
卷 113, 期 -, 页码 728-738

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2016.07.108

关键词

Decoupling; Attribution analysis; Industrial carbon emissions; Taiwan

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71203151, 71573186, 71573119]
  2. Jiangsu Natural Science Foundation for Distinguished Young Scholar [BK20140038]
  3. Jiangsu Qing Lan project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A deeper understanding of the decoupling status between carbon emissions and industrial growth as well as its influencing factors is very important in implementing targeted polices. This study applies decoupling analysis, index decomposition analysis, and attribution analysis to achieve three goals. First, the study explores the decoupling relationship between industrial growth and carbon emissions in Taiwan. Second, the factors influencing changes in industrial carbon intensity are explored. Finally, the contributions of industrial sub-sectors to each factor are analyzed. The results indicate that Taiwan's industrial growth and carbon emissions experienced a negative decoupling from 2007 to 2009 and a decoupling from 2009 to 2013. Energy intensity effect plays the dominant role in promoting decoupling, and both energy structure effect and industrial structure effect negatively impact decoupling. The chemical materials, electrical and electronic machinery and basic metal industries sub-sectors are primarily responsible for the energy intensity effect. Energy-intensive industries are the main contributors to the increase in energy structure and industrial structure effects. The study suggests that the Taiwanese government should establish targeted carbon reduction measures at sub-sector level. Adjusting the energy structure and industrial structure is also urgently required to promote the decoupling of carbon emissions from industrial growth. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据