4.7 Article

Why do many prospective analyses of CO2 emissions fail? An illustrative example from China

期刊

ENERGY
卷 244, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2021.123064

关键词

Carbon emissions; Prospective studies; Intensity targets; Energy; Productivity; China

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033, PID2019-106677GB-100]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper highlights the importance of considering the evolution of value added and productivity in accurately assessing Chinese energy-related CO2 emissions. The results show that different analytical methods lead to different conclusions, emphasizing the need for appropriate approaches in prospective analyses.
The main contribution of this paper is a demonstration of the importance of taking into account the evolution of the generation of value added and productivity to avoid biased prospective analysis of Chinese energy-related CO2 emissions. To that end, the paper delivers a Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index decomposition analysis of carbon emissions intensity from 1995 to 2014 for a balanced panel of disaggregated Chinese economic sectors. The paper shows that similar assumptions deliver different out-comes when prospective analyses are based on energy intensity, or alternatively its factorial decomposition, in order to take into account changes in the generation of value added (e.g., productivity). Following this hypothesis, the paper suggests that China will be unable to accomplish its pledged commitments under the Paris Agreement on climate change, despite strong reductions in energy intensity. Analyses based on the usual (standard) approach, by using intensity measures instead of its factorial decomposition, reach the opposite conclusion. The main lesson from this paper is that alter -native designs of prospective analysis (using alternative drivers or variables) leads to different lines of reasoning and conclusions. Therefore, researchers, consultants and policy makers will underestimate CO2 emissions if they continue to base their prospective analysis on intensity indicators. (C) 2022 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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