IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v131y2019icp187-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory mechanism design of GHG emissions in the electric power industry in China

Author

Listed:
  • Feng, Tian-tian
  • Gong, Xiao-lei
  • Guo, Yu-hua
  • Yang, Yi-sheng
  • Dong, Jun

Abstract

As one of the key industries of CO2 emissions, the electric power industry plays an important role in China's response to climate change. Recently, the electric power industry has achieved a certain amount of emission reductions through optimizing power structure and enhancing energy efficiency. However, the efforts to address climate change still lack of orderly management and supervision. In order to fulfill the goals of ‘Notice of the 13th Five-Year Work Plan for Controlling GHG emissions’ in China, that by the end of 2020 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP should decrease by 18% compared with that in 2015, there is an urgent need to establish and innovate regulatory mechanisms for Greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions in the electric power industry. This study discusses the status quo and existing problems of GHG emissions regulation of the electric power industry in China from the perspectives of regulatory agencies, measures and accounting methods. Then based on the regulatory experiences from developed countries and combined the real-life characteristics in China, a new GHG emissions regulatory index system and supervision scheme for the electric power industry is established. Finally, some recommendations are proposed for further regulatory mechanism innovation of the electric power industry in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Feng, Tian-tian & Gong, Xiao-lei & Guo, Yu-hua & Yang, Yi-sheng & Dong, Jun, 2019. "Regulatory mechanism design of GHG emissions in the electric power industry in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 187-201.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:131:y:2019:i:c:p:187-201
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.04.045
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519302952
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.04.045?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gottinger, Hans W, 1995. "Regulatory policies under uncertainty, value of information and greenhouse gas emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 51-56, January.
    2. Odeh, Naser A. & Cockerill, Timothy T., 2008. "Life cycle GHG assessment of fossil fuel power plants with carbon capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 367-380, January.
    3. Valentina Bosetti & David G. Victor, 2011. "Politics and Economics of Second-Best Regulation of Greenhouse Gases: The Importance of Regulatory Credibility," The Energy Journal, , vol. 32(1), pages 1-24, January.
    4. Wang, Jinman & Wang, Ruogu & Zhu, Yucheng & Li, Jiayan, 2018. "Life cycle assessment and environmental cost accounting of coal-fired power generation in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 374-384.
    5. Jeffrey A. Deason & Lee S. Friedman, 2010. "Intertemporal regulatory tasks and responsibilities for greenhouse gas reductions," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 821-853.
    6. Viebahn, Peter & Lechon, Yolanda & Trieb, Franz, 2011. "The potential role of concentrated solar power (CSP) in Africa and Europe--A dynamic assessment of technology development, cost development and life cycle inventories until 2050," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 4420-4430, August.
    7. Cavaliero, Carla Kazue Nakao & Da Silva, Ennio Peres, 2005. "Electricity generation:: regulatory mechanisms to incentive renewable alternative energy sources in Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(13), pages 1745-1752, September.
    8. Somorin, Tosin Onabanjo & Di Lorenzo, Giuseppina & Kolios, Athanasios J., 2017. "Life-cycle assessment of self-generated electricity in Nigeria and Jatropha biodiesel as an alternative power fuel," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 966-979.
    9. Alan H. Sanstad, 2015. "Abating Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Electric Power Generation: Model Uncertainty and Regulatory Epistemology," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S2), pages 423-445.
    10. Sebastián, F. & Royo, J. & Gómez, M., 2011. "Cofiring versus biomass-fired power plants: GHG (Greenhouse Gases) emissions savings comparison by means of LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 2029-2037.
    11. Castelo Branco, David A. & Moura, Maria Cecilia P. & Szklo, Alexandre & Schaeffer, Roberto, 2013. "Emissions reduction potential from CO2 capture: A life-cycle assessment of a Brazilian coal-fired power plant," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1221-1235.
    12. Akinyele, D.O. & Rayudu, R.K. & Nair, N.K.C., 2017. "Life cycle impact assessment of photovoltaic power generation from crystalline silicon-based solar modules in Nigeria," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 537-549.
    13. Shafie, S.M. & Mahlia, T.M.I. & Masjuki, H.H., 2013. "Life cycle assessment of rice straw co-firing with coal power generation in Malaysia," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 284-294.
    14. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Rubin, Edward S., 2013. "Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions, water and land use for concentrated solar power plants with different energy backup systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 935-950.
    15. Johnson, Kenneth C., 2007. "California's greenhouse gas law, Assembly Bill 1493: Deficiencies, alternatives, and implications for regulatory climate policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 362-372, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Asante, Dennis & He, Zheng & Adjei, Nana Osae & Asante, Bismark, 2020. "Exploring the barriers to renewable energy adoption utilising MULTIMOORA- EDAS method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    2. Tarkowski, R. & Uliasz-Misiak, B., 2022. "Towards underground hydrogen storage: A review of barriers," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    3. Ouyang, Xiaoling & Fang, Xingming & Cao, Yan & Sun, Chuanwang, 2020. "Factors behind CO2 emission reduction in Chinese heavy industries: Do environmental regulations matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    4. Xie, Pinjie & Li, Han & Sun, Feihu & Tian, Huizhen, 2021. "Analysis of the dependence of economic growth on electric power input and its influencing factors in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    5. Zhao, Tian & Liu, Zhixin, 2019. "A novel analysis of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology adoption: An evolutionary game model between stakeholders," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    6. Sun, Ya-Fang & Zhang, Yue-Jun & Su, Bin, 2022. "How does global transport sector improve the emissions reduction performance? A demand-side analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 311(C).
    7. Pan, Suyang & Ma, Jiliang & Chen, Xiaoping & Liu, Daoyin & Liang, Cai, 2023. "NH3/O2 premixed combustion in a single bubble of fluidized bed," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 349(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wu, X.D. & Guo, J.L. & Chen, G.Q., 2018. "The striking amount of carbon emissions by the construction stage of coal-fired power generation system in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 358-369.
    2. Fabio Maria Aprà & Sander Smit & Raymond Sterling & Tatiana Loureiro, 2021. "Overview of the Enablers and Barriers for a Wider Deployment of CSP Tower Technology in Europe," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-18, April.
    3. Harnpon Phungrassami & Phairat Usubharatana, 2021. "Environmental Problem Shifting Analysis of Pollution Control Units in a Coal-Fired Powerplant Based on Multiple Regression and LCA Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Singh, Bhawna & Strømman, Anders H. & Hertwich, Edgar G., 2012. "Scenarios for the environmental impact of fossil fuel power: Co-benefits and trade-offs of carbon capture and storage," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 762-770.
    5. Carlos Castro & Iñigo Capellán-Pérez, 2018. "Concentrated Solar Power: Actual Performance and Foreseeable Future in High Penetration Scenarios of Renewable Energies," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 1-20, September.
    6. Restrepo, Álvaro & Bazzo, Edson, 2016. "Co-firing: An exergoenvironmental analysis applied to power plants modified for burning coal and rice straw," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 107-119.
    7. Patel, Madhumita & Zhang, Xiaolei & Kumar, Amit, 2016. "Techno-economic and life cycle assessment on lignocellulosic biomass thermochemical conversion technologies: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 1486-1499.
    8. Dzikuć, Maciej & Piwowar, Arkadiusz, 2016. "Ecological and economic aspects of electric energy production using the biomass co-firing method: The case of Poland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 856-862.
    9. Tarun Kumar Aseri & Chandan Sharma & Tara C. Kandpal, 2022. "Condenser cooling technologies for concentrating solar power plants: a review," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 4511-4565, April.
    10. Cho, Hannah Hyunah & Strezov, Vladimir, 2021. "Comparative analysis of the environmental impacts of Australian thermal power stations using direct emission data and GIS integrated methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    11. Lingling Wang & Tsunemi Watanabe & Zhiwei Xu, 2015. "Monetization of External Costs Using Lifecycle Analysis—A Comparative Case Study of Coal-Fired and Biomass Power Plants in Northeast China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-28, February.
    12. San Miguel, G. & Corona, B., 2014. "Hybridizing concentrated solar power (CSP) with biogas and biomethane as an alternative to natural gas: Analysis of environmental performance using LCA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 580-587.
    13. Hahn Menacho, A.J. & Rodrigues, J.F.D. & Behrens, P., 2022. "A triple bottom line assessment of concentrated solar power generation in China and Europe 2020–2050," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    14. Orfanos, Neoptolemos & Mitzelos, Dimitris & Sagani, Angeliki & Dedoussis, Vassilis, 2019. "Life-cycle environmental performance assessment of electricity generation and transmission systems in Greece," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1447-1462.
    15. Shafie, S.M. & Mahlia, T.M.I. & Masjuki, H.H., 2013. "Life cycle assessment of rice straw co-firing with coal power generation in Malaysia," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 284-294.
    16. Viebahn, Peter & Daniel, Vallentin & Samuel, Höller, 2012. "Integrated assessment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the German power sector and comparison with the deployment of renewable energies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 238-248.
    17. Maung, Thein A. & McCarl, Bruce A., 2013. "Economic factors influencing potential use of cellulosic crop residues for electricity generation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 81-91.
    18. Kristína Zakuciová & Jiří Štefanica & Ana Carvalho & Vladimír Kočí, 2020. "Environmental Assessment of a Coal Power Plant with Carbon Dioxide Capture System Based on the Activated Carbon Adsorption Process: A Case Study of the Czech Republic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-18, May.
    19. Fichter, Tobias & Soria, Rafael & Szklo, Alexandre & Schaeffer, Roberto & Lucena, Andre F.P., 2017. "Assessing the potential role of concentrated solar power (CSP) for the northeast power system of Brazil using a detailed power system model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 695-715.
    20. Usaola, Julio, 2012. "Participation of CSP plants in the reserve markets: A new challenge for regulators," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 562-571.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:131:y:2019:i:c:p:187-201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.