IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i3p1106-d1579867.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Difference Analysis of Coal Carbon Emission Coefficient in China and Its Effects on Carbon Emission Calculation, Quota Allocation, and Enterprise Costs

Author

Listed:
  • Jingyu Lei

    (National Institute of Metrology, Beijing 100029, China
    National Metrology Data Center, Beijing 100029, China
    Key Laboratory of Metrology Digitalization and Digital Metrology, State Administration for Market Regulation, Beijing 100029, China)

  • Feng Chen

    (National Institute of Metrology, Beijing 100029, China
    National Metrology Data Center, Beijing 100029, China
    Key Laboratory of Metrology Digitalization and Digital Metrology, State Administration for Market Regulation, Beijing 100029, China)

  • Yinchu Wang

    (National Institute of Metrology, Beijing 100029, China
    National Metrology Data Center, Beijing 100029, China
    Key Laboratory of Metrology Digitalization and Digital Metrology, State Administration for Market Regulation, Beijing 100029, China)

  • Zilong Liu

    (National Institute of Metrology, Beijing 100029, China
    National Metrology Data Center, Beijing 100029, China
    Key Laboratory of Metrology Digitalization and Digital Metrology, State Administration for Market Regulation, Beijing 100029, China)

  • Xingchuang Xiong

    (National Institute of Metrology, Beijing 100029, China
    National Metrology Data Center, Beijing 100029, China
    Key Laboratory of Metrology Digitalization and Digital Metrology, State Administration for Market Regulation, Beijing 100029, China)

  • Xiaoping Song

    (National Institute of Metrology, Beijing 100029, China)

Abstract

China is a leading producer and consumer of coal, with coal being the dominant energy source. The accurate calculation of the mass carbon emission factor (EF m ) of coal is crucial as the carbon emissions from its combustion influence carbon emission assessment and policy formulation. However, discrepancies in EF m values across documents, due to varying net calorific values (NCVs), carbon contents (CCs), and carbon oxidation factors (COFs), have posed challenges for enterprises in carbon emission calculations. By analyzing different coal types, it is found that for anthracite, the EF m difference in different documents can reach 38.5%; for bituminous coal, it can reach 42.3%; and for lignite, it can reach 18.6%. These differences significantly affect carbon emission calculation accuracy, carbon allowance allocation fairness, and enterprise costs under the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). For instance, in 2023, the calculated carbon emissions of anthracite vary by over 300 million tons depending on the EF m used. To address these issues, relevant departments should establish a unified EF m release system, build a data sharing platform, and standardize enterprise testing standards to enhance the accuracy of carbon-related calculations and drive the low-carbon development of the coal industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Jingyu Lei & Feng Chen & Yinchu Wang & Zilong Liu & Xingchuang Xiong & Xiaoping Song, 2025. "Difference Analysis of Coal Carbon Emission Coefficient in China and Its Effects on Carbon Emission Calculation, Quota Allocation, and Enterprise Costs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-17, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:3:p:1106-:d:1579867
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/3/1106/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/3/1106/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pan, Xiongfeng & Guo, Shucen, 2024. "Decomposition analysis of regional differences in China's carbon emissions based on socio-economic factors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    2. Xiang, C. & van Gevelt, T., 2025. "China's global leadership aspirations and domestic support for climate policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    3. Al Khourdajie, Alaa & Finus, Michael, 2020. "Measures to enhance the effectiveness of international climate agreements: The case of border carbon adjustments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    4. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Kuik, Onno & Paglialunga, Elena, 2016. "Mitigation of adverse effects on competitiveness and leakage of unilateral EU climate policy: An assessment of policy instruments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 246-259.
    5. Chad M. Baum & Livia Fritz & Sean Low & Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2024. "Public perceptions and support of climate intervention technologies across the Global North and Global South," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    6. Lin, Boqiang & Song, Yijie, 2024. "Coal price shocks and economic growth: A province-level study of China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    7. Andrzej Maranda & Leszek Wachowski & Bożena Kukfisz & Dorota Markowska & Józef Paszula, 2025. "Valorization of Energetic Materials from Obsolete Military Ammunition Through Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): A Circular Economy Approach to Environmental Impact Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, January.
    8. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan & Goto, Mika, 2017. "A literature study for DEA applied to energy and environment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 104-124.
    9. Toshiyuki Sueyoshi & Mika Goto, 2017. "World trend in energy: an extension to DEA applied to energy and environment," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 6(1), pages 1-23, December.
    10. Haitao Hou & Bo Xie & Yingying Cheng, 2023. "Analysis of Carbon Emissions and Emission Reduction from Coal-Fired Power Plants Based on Dual Carbon Targets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-14, April.
    11. Yan Lu & Jing Xiang & Pengyun Geng & Huimin Zhang & Lili Liu & Haoran Wang & Jiajie Kong & Mingli Cui & Yan Li & Cheng Zhong & Tiantian Feng, 2023. "Coupling Mechanism and Synergic Development of Carbon Market and Electricity Market in the Region of Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-22, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gabriel Felbermayr & Sonja Peterson & Joschka Wanner, 2022. "The Impact of Trade and Trade Policy on the Environment and the Climate. A Review," WIFO Working Papers 649, WIFO.
    2. Fei Mo & Derek Wang, 2019. "Environmental Sustainability of Road Transport in OECD Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-14, September.
    3. Toshiyuki Sueyoshi & Mika Goto, 2018. "Difficulties and remedies on DEA environmental assessment," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 7(1), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Toshiyuki Sueyoshi & Youngbok Ryu, 2020. "Performance Assessment of the Semiconductor Industry: Measured by DEA Environmental Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-24, November.
    5. Harpinder Sandhu, 2021. "Bottom-Up Transformation of Agriculture and Food Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    6. Shogo Eguchi & Hirotaka Takayabu & Mitsuki Kaneko & Shigemi Kagawa & Shunichi Hienuki, 2021. "Proposing effective strategies for meeting an environmental regulation with attainable technology improvement targets," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 2907-2921, November.
    7. Xiaochun Zhao & Huixin Xu & Qun Sun, 2022. "Research on China’s Carbon Emission Efficiency and Its Regional Differences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-14, August.
    8. Talat S. Genc & Stephen Kosempel, 2023. "Energy Transition and the Economy: A Review Article," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-26, March.
    9. Toshiyuki Sueyoshi & Mika Goto, 2021. "Performance Assessment of Japanese Electricity and Gas Companies during 2002–2018: Three DEA Approaches," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, March.
    10. Atris, Amani Mohammed & Goto, Mika, 2019. "Vertical structure and efficiency assessment of the US oil and gas companies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Badunenko, Oleg & Galeotti, Marzio & Hunt, Lester C., 2021. "Better to grow or better to improve? Measuring environmental efficiency in OECD countries with a Stochastic Environmental Kuznets Frontier," FEEM Working Papers 316226, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    12. Bai-Chen Xie & Jie Gao & Shuang Zhang & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2017. "What Factors Affect the Competiveness of Power Generation Sector in China? An Analysis Based on Game Cross-efficiency," Working Papers 2017.12, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    13. Abad, A. & Ravelojaona, P., 2025. "An unified framework for measuring environmentally-adjusted productivity change: Theoretical basis and empirical illustration," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 320(3), pages 642-654.
    14. Wang, Junbo & Ma, Zhenyu & Fan, Xiayang, 2023. "We are all in the same boat: The welfare and carbon abatement effects of the EU carbon border adjustment mechanism," MPRA Paper 118978, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Arnaud Abad & Michell Arias & Paola Ravelojaona, 2023. "Environmental Productivity Assessment: an Illustration with the Ecuadorian Oil Industry," Post-Print hal-03574542, HAL.
    16. Feng, Xuesong & Tao, Zhibin & Shi, Ruolin, 2024. "The Spatiotemporal exploration of intercity transport energy efficiency in the mainland of China on the basis of improved stochastic frontier modelling," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    17. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi & Elena Paglialunga, 2019. "Capital–energy substitutability in manufacturing sectors: methodological and policy implications," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(2), pages 157-182, June.
    18. Hongli Liu & Xiaoyu Yan & Jinhua Cheng & Jun Zhang & Yan Bu, 2021. "Driving Factors for the Spatiotemporal Heterogeneity in Technical Efficiency of China’s New Energy Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-21, July.
    19. Yvonne Wolfmayr & Elisabeth Christen & Hendrik Mahlkow & Birgit Meyer & Michael Pfaffermayr, 2024. "Trade and Welfare Effects of New Trade Policy Instruments," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 70732, August.
    20. Youngbok Ryu & Toshiyuki Sueyoshi, 2021. "Examining the Relationship between the Economic Performance of Technology-Based Small Suppliers and Socially Sustainable Procurement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-23, June.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:3:p:1106-:d:1579867. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.