"一带一路"沿线主要国家碳捕集、利用和封存潜力与前景研究

碳捕集、利用和封存（CCUS）技术是世界公认的最有前景的碳减排技术之一,它在不改变能源结构的前提下,实现碳的有效封存,是协调经济发展和环境可持续的双赢策略。为了探讨“一带一路”沿线主要国家CCUS技术的发展前景,文中基于CO₂封存机理和CO₂在油藏和气藏中理论封存量的评估方法,分析了“一带一路”沿线主要国家CO₂的封存潜力。结果表明,“一带一路”沿线主要国家有较高的CO₂封存潜力, 在油藏和气藏中的理论封存量达到6200亿t。虽然目前沿线大部分国家CCUS技术都处于起步阶段,但在政府投资和政策的支持下,CCUS技术将为“一带一路”沿线主要国家碳减排目标的实现做出重要贡献。     

中国燃煤电厂碳捕集与生物质掺烧碳捕集改造的经济性

碳捕集与封存（CCS）技术作为解决全球气候变化问题的重要手段之一,能够有效减少CO₂排放。中国作为碳排放大国,当前电力的主要来源仍是煤电,碳捕集（CC）改造在燃煤电厂中有很大的应用潜力。经济性对CC改造的部署至关重要。为此,本文计算了中国各省典型电厂CC改造前后的平准化度电成本,比较了不同省份的CO₂捕集成本与CO₂避免成本,分析了不同掺烧率下生物质掺烧结合碳捕集(bioenergy with carbon capture,BECC)改造的经济性。研究发现,CC改造会导致不同地区的燃煤电厂度电成本增加57.51%~93.38%。煤价较低的华北和西北地区（青海除外）CC改造经济性较好,BECC改造则更适合华中地区。建议在推进燃煤电厂CC和BECC改造时要充分考虑区域资源特点,完善碳市场建设,形成合理碳价以促进CC和BECC部署。     

国外陆上碳捕获和封存的立法及其启示

碳捕获和封存技术正越来越受到国际社会重视,很多国家通过立法推动碳捕获和封存技术的发展。其中,陆上碳捕获和封存的发展较为引人注目。陆上碳捕获和封存涉及CO2的捕获、运输、注入和封存4个流程,其中捕获和运输可以由各国现行的法律加以规范,而注入和封存则需要新的法律予以制约。根据国外陆上碳捕获和封存技术的立法经验,以及我国现行的相关法律法规来看,为了推动陆上碳捕获和封存在我国的健康发展,应当构建注重监管的公法体系和注重救济的私法体系。     

碳捕获和封存技术认知、政策现状与减排潜力分析

在综合大量相关资料的基础上,研究总结了碳捕获和封存（CCS）技术的发展现状、示范项目进展和相关的国际法规政策,分析了其大规模应用的障碍,并将CCS技术与提高能效、发展可再生能源等减排技术方案进行了对比。分析认为,一方面我国需审慎评估CCS技术推广使用可能产生的负面影响;另一方面我国也需要适当加大对CCS关键技术的研发投入,避免在技术上受制于人。此外,有关CCS推广的财税政策的推出,需要视CCS技术的实际发展情况而定。我国还需要根据现实情况,重点考虑如何对现有火电厂进行改造,为CCS技术未来的大规模推广打下基础。     

碳中和目标下中国燃煤电厂CCUS集群部署优化研究

燃煤电厂作为中国最大的CO₂排放源,是中国实现碳中和目标的关键点。CO₂捕集、利用与封存（CCUS）技术是目前煤电行业实现深度减排的唯一途径,碳约束情景下,CCUS技术将在实现煤电碳达峰、碳中和目标中发挥不可或缺的作用。研究中首先使用综合环境控制模型（IECM）对燃煤电厂捕集技术环节的成本构成和经济性进行核算,得到中国燃煤电厂逐厂CO₂捕集成本和捕集量;其次,基于地质利用封存潜力及分布特征,构建CCUS源汇匹配优化模型,得到碳中和目标下的煤电CCUS项目分阶段布局方案;最后,以优化基础设施建设并通过规模经济降低成本为前提,使用聚类分析方法对煤电CCUS项目集群进行识别,进一步构建改进成本最小生成树模型,得到CCUS项目集群最低成本CO₂输送管道网络的路线优化策略。研究表明：碳中和目标约束下,需要对总装机容量约为355 GW的300个燃煤电厂进行CCUS技术改造,2030—2060年间可实现累积减排190.11 亿t CO₂。煤电CCUS项目集群主要分布在华中、华北和西北地区,通过建立CCUS枢纽以实现CO₂运输基础设施共享,在松辽盆地、渤海湾盆地、苏北盆地和鄂尔多斯盆地优先开展CCUS早期集成示范项目,能显著降低运输成本,推动CCUS技术大规模、商业化发展。     

基于自然的解决方案：中国应对气候变化领域的政策进展、问题与对策

基于自然的解决方案（NbS）在应对气候变化领域的重要作用日益受到国际社会的关注。本文将NbS在应对气候变化领域的生态系统划分为森林、草地、农田、湿地、海洋、城市,采用传统环境政策工具分类,将六大生态系统的政策工具划分为命令控制型、经济激励型、自愿参与型三类。在此基础上,梳理构建NbS在我国应对气候变化领域的政策框架。结果表明,我国初步形成了以命令控制型政策为主,重视通过经济激励型政策引导,并逐步完善自愿参与型政策的NbS政策体系。然而,NbS在我国应对气候变化领域的政策仍存在诸多问题,包括NbS尚未成为应对气候变化的主流措施、缺乏自上而下的管理机制、未形成理论与实践的有机统一、资金来源单一、技术支撑和能力建设薄弱、公众参与度有待进一步加强等。为发挥NbS在我国应对气候变化领域的潜力,建议将NbS纳入我国下阶段国家自主贡献更新文件中,争取提出有关NbS的定量承诺,推动NbS成为应对气候变化的主流措施,构建自上而下的管理机制,建立多元化的资金投入机制,加强从理论到实践、从路径到政策的研究,提升能力保障和公众参与度。     

控制中国汽车交通燃油消耗和温室气体排放的技术选择与政策体系

 中国的汽车交通面临着燃油短缺和温室气体排放上升的双重压力,本文从中国经济发展的背景和中国汽车平均燃油消耗量的国际差距入手,通过分析汽车行业的技术选择,建立了汽车交通的燃油消耗和温室气体排放的分析框架。分析后认为,要控制中国汽车交通的燃油消耗和温室气体排放,就要运用一系列技术手段和政策手段控制汽车保有量、降低汽车平均行驶里程、提高单车的燃油经济性水平和降低汽车排放水平。最后,对所提出的政策体系进行了分析和评价。     

碳市场建设路径研究：国际经验及对中国的启示

基于国际碳市场建设的初始决策环境,从政治诉求、决策环境、经济基础、市场根基等4个维度的32个子指标构建了碳市场建立背景与条件指标体系,据此深入挖掘了欧盟碳排放权交易体系(EU ETS)、美国区域温室气体减排行动(RGGI)、美国西部行动倡议(WCI)等国际典型碳市场建立的背景与基础条件,并归纳出各国建立不同类型碳市场的必要条件,进而判断中国建立各类碳市场所具备的条件和不足之处。研究发现：跨界联盟型碳市场建立通常具备经济联系紧密、单个地区减排成本过高和地理位置临近等3个要点;国家型碳市场建立通常考虑到了国家强制减排责任、能源结构转型需求强烈和稳固的国家立法保障等方面;地区型碳市场的建立需满足地区减排诉求强烈与国家层面排放权立法缺失等条件;行业型碳市场建立的基础条件则包括温室气体排放集中度高、行业竞争力保护、重点行业排放需求增长和行业排放数据基础稳固等4个特征。当前,中国碳市场应重点考虑行业型与跨界联盟型碳市场并行的建设模式,进一步完善碳市场监管法律体系,加快各省市排放数据清单制作,加强地方碳市场能力建设培训,尽快完善国家型碳市场建立的基本条件,进而实现温室气体减排与产业结构升级的双重目标。     

国际粮食政策研究所（IFPRI）：《农业和气候变化：哥本哈根的谈判议程》

国际粮食政策研究所（IFPRI）发表了这份由粮食政策专家撰写的报告。报告指出,农业将受到气候变化的“显著”影响,但是如果贯彻实施正确的政策,农业还可能强有力地遏制气候变化。报告认为,在通向12月于丹麦哥本哈根举行的《联合国气候变化框架公约》谈判的进程中,农业的角色尚未得到支持。IFPRI的负责人3月31日在美国华盛顿的报告发布仪式上说,目前的国际气候变化协议——《京都议定书》中并未重点提及农业,这是由于那时候人们对于农业和气候变化的关系知之甚少。IFPRI的研究员吉拉德·尼尔森说：“我们现在所处的情况是谈判将为未来的5～15年设置新的机制。关键在于这次要把农业纳入其中。”     

参加古巴“将气候风险评估管理的实践、手段、制度和减灾策略纳入国家政策计划”技术研讨会总结

“将气候风险评估管理的实践、手段、制度和减灾策略纳入国家政策计划”技术研讨会于2009年3月10～12日在古巴哈瓦那召开。该会议由联合国气候变化框架公约（UNFCCC）和联合国国际减灾署（UNISDR）联合举办,联合国气候变化框架公约秘书处主办。     

碳捕获与封存技术潜在的环境影响及对策建议

作为减缓气候变化行动的选择方案之一,碳捕获与封存（CCS）技术受到国际社会特别是发达国家的格外关注,但是能否得到广泛应用,除了要取决于其技术成熟度、成本,在发展中国家的技术普及和转让及其应用技术的能力,政策法规等因素外,其潜在的环境影响及其管理也是目前备受关注的一个问题。因此,针对CCS技术潜在的环境影响以及目前发达国家关于CCS技术环境影响的管理进行了分析,并对我国未来CCS技术的环境管理提出了一些对策建议。     

Forage Yield-Based Carbon Storage in Grasslands of China

Forage yield-based carbon storage in 18 grasslands of China was estimated according to the detailed investigation of grassland area and forage yield (standing crop), which were derived from a 10-year national grassland survey. The total forage yield carbon in Chinese grasslands is 134.09 Tg C for ca. 299 × 10⁶ ha of grassland area and 1232 kg/ha of mean forage yield. The carbon storage is different depending on grassland types and climatic regions. Meadow, steppe and tussock occupy 93.3% (125.14 Tg C), and desert and swamp only accounts for 6.7% (8.95 Tg C) of total forage yield carbon. Forage yield carbon is stored largely in temperate (38.4%, 51.54 Tg C) and alpine regions (30.4%, 40.78 Tg C), and to less extent in tropical regions (22.1%, 29.66 Tg C). These three regions take 91% of the forage yield carbon in grasslands of China. The warm-temperate region accounts for only 9% (12.1 Tg C) of forage yields carbon. The forage yield-based carbon in grasslands of China is more accurate than the site biomass-based carbon estimate and the carbon density-based estimate. Although, forage yield carbon storage is small compared with the total carbon storage in China, carbon budgets of grasslands are often a dominant component in many regions and provide an important management opportunity to enhance terrestrial carbon sinks in vast areas of China.     

Climate policy strength compared: China,the US,the EU,India, Russia,and Japan

The few systematic international comparisons of climate policy strength made so far have serious weaknesses, particularly those that assign arbitrary weightings to different policy instrument types in order to calculate an aggregate score for policy strength. This article avoids these problems by ranking the six biggest emitters by far – China, the US, the EU, India, Russia, and Japan – on a set of six key policy instruments that are individually potent and together representative of climate policy as a whole: carbon taxes, emissions trading, feed-in tariffs, renewable energy quotas, fossil fuel power plant bans, and vehicle emissions standards. The results cast strong doubt on any idea that there is a clear hierarchy on climate policy with Europe at the top: the EU does lead on a number of policies but so does Japan. China, the US, and India each lead on one area. Russia is inactive on all fronts. At the same time climate policy everywhere remains weak compared to what it could be.

Policy relevance

This study enables climate policy strength, defined as the extent to which the statutory provisions of climate policies are likely to restrict GHG emissions if implemented as intended, to be assessed and compared more realistically across space and time. As such its availability for the six biggest emitters, which together account for over 70% of global CO₂ emissions, should facilitate international negotiations (1) by giving participants a better idea of where major emitters stand relative to each other as far as climate policy stringency is concerned, and (2) by identifying areas of weakness that need action.     

基于MRIO模型的中美欧日贸易隐含碳特点对比分析

基于GTAP8数据库,构建了2004年和2007年全球多区域投入产出（MRIO）表,测算了中国、美国、欧盟和日本基于生产端和消费端的碳排放量,对比了中、美、欧、日各自对外贸易隐含碳特征,分析了中美、中欧、中日双边贸易中的隐含碳特点。结果表明：2004和2007年,中国基于生产端的碳排放高出消费端15%以上,而美、欧、日则低5%左右;中国是隐含碳净出口国,而美、欧、日则属于隐含碳净进口国;中国出口隐含碳最高的前三个行业依次是设备制造业、纺织服装业和其他制造业;美、欧出口隐含碳最多的行业则是设备制造业、交通业和石化工业,日本的出口隐含碳高度集中于设备制造业。     

Uncertainty in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) deployment projections: a cross-model comparison exercise

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) can be a valuable CO₂ mitigation option, but what role CCS will play in the future is uncertain. In this paper we analyze the results of different integrated assessment models (IAMs) taking part in the 27th round of the Energy Modeling Forum (EMF) with respect to the role of CCS in long term mitigation scenarios. Specifically we look into the use of CCS as a function of time, mitigation targets, availability of renewables and its use with different fuels. Furthermore, we explore the possibility to relate model results to general and CCS specific model assumptions. The results show a wide range of cumulative capture in the 2010–2100 period (600–3050 GtCO₂), but the fact that no model projects less than 600 GtCO₂ indicates that CCS is considered to be important by all these models. Interestingly, CCS storage rates are often projected to be still increasing in the second half of this century. Depending on the scenario, at least six out of eight, up to all models show higher storage rates in 2100 than in 2050. CCS shares in cumulative primary energy use are in most models increasing with the stringency of the target or under conservative availability of renewables. The strong variations of CCS deployment projection rates could not be related to the reported differences in the assumptions of the models by means of a cross-model comparison in this sample.     

Frontiers of CO2 Capture and Utilization (CCU) towards Carbon Neutrality

CO₂ capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technology is a rare option for the large-scale use of fossil fuels in a low-carbon way, which will definitely play a part in the journey towards carbon neutrality. Within the CCUS nexus, CCU is especially interesting because these processes will establish a new “atmosphere-to-atmosphere” carbon cycle and thus indirectly offer huge potential in carbon reduction. This study focuses on the new positioning of CCUS in the carbon neutrality scenario and aims to identify potential cutting-edge/disruptive CCU technologies that may find important application opportunities during the decarbonization of the energy and industrial system. To this end, direct air capture (DAC), flexible metal-framework materials (MOFs) for CO₂ capture, integrated CO₂ capture and conversion (ICCC), and electrocatalytic CO₂ reduction (ECR) were selected, and their general introduction, the importance to carbon neutrality, and most up-to-date research progress are summarized.     

Carbon Capture and Storage From Fossil Fuels and Biomass – Costs and Potential Role in Stabilizing the Atmosphere

The capture and storage of CO₂ from combustion of fossil fuels is gaining attraction as a means to deal with climate change. CO₂ emissions from biomass conversion processes can also be captured. If that is done, biomass energy with CO₂ capture and storage (BECS) would become a technology that removes CO₂ from the atmosphere and at the same time deliver CO₂-neutral energy carriers (heat, electricity or hydrogen) to society. Here we present estimates of the costs and conversion efficiency of electricity, hydrogen and heat generation from fossil fuels and biomass with CO₂ capture and storage. We then insert these technology characteristics into a global energy and transportation model (GET 5.0), and calculate costs of stabilizing atmospheric CO₂ concentration at 350 and 450 ppm. We find that carbon capture and storage technologies applied to fossil fuels have the potential to reduce the cost of meeting the 350 ppm stabilisation targets by 50% compared to a case where these technologies are not available and by 80% when BECS is allowed. For the 450 ppm scenario, the reduction in costs is 40 and 42%, respectively. Thus, the difference in costs between cases where BECS technologies are allowed and where they are not is marginal for the 450 ppm stabilization target. It is for very low stabilization targets that negative emissions become warranted, and this makes BECS more valuable than in cases with higher stabilization targets. Systematic and stochastic sensitivity analysis is performed. Finally, BECS opens up the possibility to remove CO₂ from the atmosphere. But this option should not be seen as an argument in favour of doing nothing about the climate problem now and then switching on this technology if climate change turns out to be a significant problem. It is not likely that BECS can be initiated sufficiently rapidly at a sufficient scale to follow this path to avoiding abrupt and serious climate changes if that would happen.     

碳税政策的减排效果与经济影响

采用基于动态可计算一般均衡模型（CGE）构建的能源－环境－经济模型,模拟了在考虑能源利用效率提高的基础上,不同碳税税率以及碳税收入使用方式的减排效果及对经济的影响。结果表明,与基准情景相比,如果碳税收入直接归政府所有,征收30、60、90元/t CO₂碳税,2020年的减排率分别为5.56%、10.45%和14.74%,GDP损失率分别为0.04%、0.10%和0.18%。征收碳税可实现的减排量,分别相当于实现2020年CO₂排放强度比2005年下降40%的目标所需减排量的9.9%、18.6%和26.2%。将碳税收入返还给企业和居民,能在一定程度上缓解对企业和居民的负面影响。