中国钢铁行业节能减排措施的协同控制效应评估研究

以中国钢铁行业为研究对象,对典型行业节能减排措施开展协同控制效应评估分析,试图为制定行业局地大气污染物与温室气体协同控制行动方案和规划提供依据.首先采用排放因子法计算各项措施对各类局地大气污染物和各类温室气体的减排量,并归一化为综合大气污染物协同减排量(ICER),进而采用协同控制效应坐标系、协同控制交叉弹性、单位污染...     

中国水泥行业节能减排措施的协同控制效应评估研究

水泥行业是温室气体与局地污染物协同控制的重点行业。以往该行业的协同控制评估或针对个别企业,或采用自上而下和自下而上模拟模型结合情景分析评估行业协同减排效益,尚缺乏系统评估水泥行业全系列节能减排措施（或技术）协同控制效果的研究。文中首先测算水泥行业24项节能减排措施综合大气污染物协同减排量,再通过协同控制效应坐标系、交叉弹性、单位污染物减排成本等评估指标和方法,对这些措施开展协同控制效果评估。结果表明大多数节能减排措施可协同减排局地大气污染物;协同减排潜力最大的是结构调整措施;能效提升与节能措施的协同减排成本较低,但减排潜力有限。本文强化了水泥行业节能减排措施的协同控制效能特性分析,可为水泥行业开展协同控制路径规划提供参考。     

中国交通行业实施环境经济政策的协同控制效应研究

目前,交通行业已成为中国局地大气污染物和温室气体的重要排放来源之一,而且随着交通运输规模的不断扩大,与工业和生活排放相比,交通排放贡献占比呈相对增加趋势.文中构建了"CGE-CIMS联合模型",对中国交通行业实施环境经济政策的局地大气污染物和CO2协同控制效应进行量化评估.结果显示,与BAU情景相比,环境税、碳税、成品...     

中国交通部门污染物与温室气体协同控制模拟研究

开展交通领域大气污染物与温室气体协同减排研究对于实现能源、环境和气候变化综合管理具有重要意义.文中以我国交通部门污染物与温室气体协同治理为切入点,开展道路、铁路、水运、航空和管道运输等各子部门未来需求预测,并运用长期能源可替代规划系统模型(LEAP),通过构建基准情景、污染减排情景、绿色低碳情景和强化低碳情景,模拟分析...     

工业部门污染物治理协同控制温室气体效应评价——基于重庆市的实证分析

以高能耗为主要特征的工业部门是大气污染物和温室气体的重要排放源.为推动协同管控,文中结合生态环境部在重庆市组织开展的试点工作,对工业企业NOx污染治理协同控制温室气体的效应进行了量化分析.结果表明,以末端治理为手段的NOx治理措施协同控制温室气体的效果为负,即工业企业去除1 t NOx会直接或间接增加CO2排放1.81...     

陶瓷行业减污降碳协同增效案例评估——基于干法制粉的实证分析

干法制粉是陶瓷行业重要的节能减排技术之一,但目前并未得到广泛应用。文中以南、北方各一家代表企业作为案例,针对干法制粉开展减污降碳协同增效评估。通过文献调研和实地考证,采用产排污系数法计算了干、湿法制粉技术大气污染物和CO₂减排量,并进行了对比分析。结果表明,与湿法制粉工艺（天然气）相比,同样生产1 t粉料,干法制粉可以减少51%的CO₂排放;同时大气污染物明显下降,其中颗粒物降低了42%,NO_X下降了45%,SO₂降低了42%。协同控制交叉弹性分析结果进一步表明干法制粉在减排大气污染物的同时可以实现较好的温室气体减排效果。由于南、北方原料含水率的差异,北方干法制粉能耗与南方相比下降51%,在原料含水率较低的北方应用干法制粉减污降碳效果更好。     

碳排放权交易的减污降碳协同效应及影响机制

减污降碳协同共治能够缓解我国环境质量改善和温室气体减排的双重压力。碳排放权交易是减碳的关键市场手段,厘清其对大气污染治理的协同作用至关重要。文中基于2006—2019年我国省级面板数据,使用双重差分法(DID)分析了碳排放权交易试点政策的协同作用,并通过中介效应模型检验了其影响机制。研究发现：碳交易试点具有显著的减污降碳协同效应,其中CO₂与SO₂的协同控制效果最显著,但政策效应的持续性有待增强;政策能通过降低能源消费量、改善能源结构这两条路径降低CO₂与大气污染物排放,但调整产业结构尚不存在该传导作用。为增强碳排放权交易的减污降碳协同效应,文中从加强碳交易监管力度、坚持能源消费提质降耗、扩大全国碳市场行业覆盖范围3个方面提出了政策建议。     

应对气候变化与保护生物多样性协同：全球实践与启示

气候变化与生物多样性丧失是当前全球面临的两大热点和难点环境问题,二者协同推进的必要性和重要性也在全球范围内形成广泛共识。文中在总结我国“双碳”目标下应对气候变化与保护生物多样性协同的现状与挑战的基础上,对近年来各国应对气候变化和保护生物多样性协同方面的政策实践进行了系统梳理与总结,各主要国家近年来在战略规划、生态空间、绿色金融、科技创新等方面进行了大量实践探索以推动二者协同,在这些实践推动下,全球已逐渐将“碳中和”和“生物多样性”融入生态环境治理新格局、将基于自然的解决方案（NbS）作为二者协同领域最有效的新路径、将绿色金融和科技创新作为推动二者协同发展的新动力。鉴于此,我国在二者协同推进中亟需将生物多样性保护纳入双碳“1+N”政策体系,注重将基于自然的解决方案融入城镇化、乡村振兴等重大国家发展战略,鼓励引导绿色金融、数字科技支持二者协同的重点领域,提高公众认知和社会参与,以推进二者协同并助力我国成为全球生态治理的重要参与者、贡献者和引领者。     

城市减污降碳协同度评价指标体系构建及应用研究

中国强调要把减污降碳协同增效作为促进经济社会发展全面绿色转型的总抓手,并提出“到2025年,减污降碳协同度有效提升”的目标。因此,开展减污降碳协同度评价研究具有迫切的现实需求。文中在解析城市减污降碳协同度内涵的基础上,研究构建了城市减污降碳协同度评价指标体系,包括一级指标3个、二级指标13个、三级指标22个。同时,选择北京市、重庆市、唐山市和西宁市分别代表服务型、综合型、工业型和生态优先型城市,开展城市减污降碳协同度评价指标体系应用研究。结果表明,文中构建的城市减污降碳协同度评价指标体系具有普适性和可操作性,评价结果有现实意义。建议将该指标体系作为国家推进城市减污降碳协同创新试点工作及城市开展减污降碳协同度评价研究的重要参考。     

“千分之四全球土壤增碳计划”对中国的挑战与应对策略

《联合国气候变化框架公约》(UNFCCC)第21次缔约方大会通过《巴黎协议》之际,法国农业部提出了"千分之四全球土壤增碳计划",随后被UNFCCC宣布正式启动。本文分析了该计划的背景与土壤固碳技术要求及其对中国固碳减排和气候变化外交的可能挑战。考虑到中国温室气体排放高,土壤碳库和当前固碳速率较低,而且预估的固碳潜力不确定性较大导致固碳目标设置困难,建议中国暂缓加入该计划,并可基于中国农业废弃物炭化技术可以达到较高的固碳减排效益,提出以生物质废弃物治理为中心的农业能源-土壤-肥料一体化减排增碳计划,主动应对新的气候变化减排外交,推进农业减污减肥减排的生态文明建设。     

Shifting discourses of climate change in India

Developing countries like India are under international pressure to sign a legally binding emissions treaty to avert catastrophic climatic change. Developing countries, however, have argued that any international agreement must be based on historic and per capita carbon emissions, with developed countries responsible for reducing their emissions first and funding mitigation and adaptation in other countries. Recently, however, several scholars have argued that Indian government climate change discourses are shifting, primarily by recognizing the “co-benefits” of an alignment between its development and climate change objectives, and by displaying increasing “flexibility” on mitigation targets. This study investigates the factors driving shifting Indian discourses of climate change by conducting and analyzing 25 interviews of Indian climate policy elites, including scientists, energy policy experts, leading government officials, journalists, business leaders, and advocates, in addition to analysis of articles published in Economic and Political Weekly (a prominent Indian policy journal), and reports published by the government and other agencies. Our analysis suggests that India’s concerns about increasing energy access and security, along with newer concerns about vulnerability to climate change and the international leadership aspirations of the Indian government, along with emergence of new actors and institutions, has led to plurality of discourses, with potential implications for India’s climate change policies.     

Health co-benefits and the development of climate change mitigation policies in the European Union

The 2015 Paris Agreement requires increasingly ambitious emissions reduction efforts from its member countries. Accounting for ancillary positive health outcomes (health co-benefits) that result from implementing climate change mitigation policies can provide Parties to the Paris Agreement with a sound rationale for introducing stronger mitigation strategies. Despite this recognition, a knowledge gap exists on the role of health co-benefits in the development of climate change mitigation policies. To address this gap, the case study presented here investigates the role of health co-benefits in the development of European Union (EU) climate change mitigation policies through analysis and consideration of semi-structured interview data, government documents, journal articles and media releases. We find that while health co-benefits are an explicit consideration in the development of EU climate change mitigation policies, their influence on final policy outcomes has been limited. Our analysis suggests that whilst health co-benefits are a key driver of air pollution mitigation policies, climate mitigation policies are primarily driven by other factors, including economic costs and energy implications.

Key policy insights

• Health co-benefits are quantified and monetized as part of the development of EU climate change mitigation policies but their influence on the final policies agreed upon is limited.

• Barriers, such as the immediate economic costs associated with climate action, inhibit the influence of health co-benefits on the development of mitigation policies.

• Health co-benefits primarily drive the development of EU air pollution mitigation policies.

• The separation of responsibility for GHG and non-GHG emissions across Directorate Generals has decoupled climate change and air pollution mitigation policies, with consequences for the integration of health co-benefits in climate policy.

     

Air quality benefit of China’s mitigation target to peak its emission by 2030

In 2015, China committed to reducing its emission intensity per unit of gross domestic product by 60–65% from its 2005 rate and to peak its carbon emission by 2030. Problems related to local pollutants and haze are simultaneously worsening in China. This article focuses on the critical topic of co-controlling carbon emission and local air pollutants and evaluates the co-benefit of carbon mitigation in local pollutant reduction by using a partial equilibrium model that links carbon emission and local air pollutants at the technological level. Three conclusions can be drawn from the scenario analysis. First, in the reference scenario, energy consumption and carbon emission continue to increase and air quality is expected to deteriorate in the future. Therefore, current pollutant control measures should be improved. Second, local pollutants will be significantly reduced in the end-of-pipe control scenario, but the reduction will still be inadequate to fulfil the air quality target. Third, emissions of SO₂, NO_x, and PM_2.5 in 2030 will be reduced by 78.85%, 77.56%, and 83.32%, respectively, compared with the 2010 levels in the co-control scenario involving the peaking effort in China. Therefore, the air quality targets can also be achieved when the peaking target is fulfilled. The Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) of China to peak its emission by 2030 is consistent with its domestic interest to improve local air quality.

POLICY RELEVANCE

China submitted its INDC to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2015 and has promised to peak its carbon emission by 2030. In recent years, China has also faced severe pressure to address its air pollution problem. Air quality is an important driving force to incentivize more ambitious mitigation measures that can contribute to the simultaneous reduction of carbon emission and air pollutants. Air quality benefit provides a strong justification for the INDC of China and the possibility of early peaking. Moreover, the co-benefit in China can be a reference for other developing countries that are facing the same challenge and can reinforce the initiative of these countries to promote ambitious mitigation actions.     

基于自然的气候变化解决方案

基于自然的解决方案(NbS)是近10年提出的人类社会应对一系列环境和社会挑战的成本有效的方式,但直到近期才在国际社会引起重视。针对气候变化,NbS指通过对生态系统的保护、恢复和可持续管理减缓气候变化,同时利用生态系统及其服务功能帮助人类和野生生物适应气候变化带来的影响和挑战。这些生态系统包括森林、农田、草地、湿地（海岸带）生态系统,人工的或天然的。NbS能够为实现《巴黎协定》目标贡献30%左右的减排潜力,同时带来巨大的环境和社会经济的协同效益。但是,在过去的气候变化政策和行动中,包括国家自主贡献（INDC）,NbS尚未得到充分的重视,流入NbS相关的气候资金明显不足。为充分发挥NbS的潜力,建议开展中国NbS减排潜力及其协同效应研究,识别成本有效的中国NbS优先领域,梳理国际国内NbS成功案例,制定推动NbS主流化相关激励政策,推动多领域NbS协同治理。     

How does framing affect policy support for emissions mitigation? Testing the effects of ocean acidification and other carbon emissions frames

Public support for carbon emissions mitigation is crucial to motivate action to address global issues like climate change and ocean acidification (OA). Yet in the public sphere, carbon emissions mitigation policies are typically discussed in the context of climate change and rarely in the context of OA or other global change outcomes. In this paper, we advance research on OA and climate change perceptions and communication, by (i) examining causal beliefs about ocean acidification, and (ii) measuring support for mitigation policies from individuals presented with one of five different policy frames (climate change, global warming, carbon pollution, air pollution, and ocean acidification). Knowledge about OA causes and consequences is more widespread than we anticipated, though still generally low. Somewhat surprisingly, an “air pollution” mitigation frame elicits the highest degree of policy support overall, while “carbon pollution” performs no better than “climate change” or “global warming.” Framing effects are in part contingent on prior knowledge and attitudes, and mediated by concern. Perhaps due to a lack of OA awareness, the OA frame generates the least support overall, although it seems to close the gap in support associated with political orientation: the OA frame increases support among those (few) conservatives who report having heard of OA before the survey. These findings complement previous work on climate change communication and suggest the need for further research into OA as an effective way to engage conservatives in carbon emissions mitigation policy. Potentially even more promising is the air pollution framing.     

Biofuel’s carbon balance: doubts, certainties and implications

In addition to lower carbon dioxide emissions, policies to reduce fossil fuel combustion can yield substantial air quality co-benefits via reduced emissions of co-pollutants such as particulate matter and air toxics. If co-pollutant intensity (the ratio of co-pollutant impacts to carbon dioxide emissions) varies across pollution sources, efficient policy design would seek greater emissions reductions where co-benefits are higher. The distribution of co-benefits also raises issues of environmental equity. This paper presents evidence on intersectoral, intrasectoral and spatial variations in co-pollutant intensity of industrial point sources in the United States, and discusses options for integrating co-benefits into climate policy design to advance efficiency and equity.