共查询到18条相似文献，搜索用时 125 毫秒
1.
以人均国际航空CO2历史累计排放为基础,借用收入分配公平的研究思路,构造了碳洛伦兹曲线和碳基尼系数,以此来测度各国历史上国际航空碳排放权的不公平使用。对碳基尼系数计算分析表明,历史上国际航空碳排放存在巨大的不公平性,但随累计起始年的延后,不公平性被部分掩盖。国际航空碳排放权公平分配是构建国际航空全球减排机制的关键问题,本文提出的以责任-能力指数为基础构建的国际航空碳排放权分配方案,体现了公平原则。以实现“2020年碳中性”目标为例,运用本文构建的分配方案,计算出了各国2021年分配的碳减排量。 相似文献
2.
利用统计数据,参照政府间气候变化专门委员会（IPCC）的方法,对2008年我国各省区CO2的排放情况进行了计算分析,并对东西部地区进行对比得出：东部发达地区在人均排放量和排放密度等方面均高于西部欠发达地区,但东部地区的排放强度却明显低于西部地区。国家经济战略,东、西部地区技术、经济社会发展水平差异是造成这一趋势的主要原因。提出了我国实现温室气体减排目标、分解减排任务的建议。 相似文献
3.
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。 相似文献
4.
本文应用LMDI分解分析方法对中国2000—2014年生产部门CO2排放量变化做因素分解分析,同时结合STIRPAT模型建立CO2预测模型,分析2017—2030年中国的CO2排放情况。结果表明,经济增长和能耗强度变化对中国CO2排放量变化的影响分别为114.9%、-22.6%。基于预测模型变量构建未来情景,设定正常路线、减排路线和激进路线3条路线,共包含9种情景。正常路线的低碳情景和减排路线的基准情景下可实现2025年达到CO2排放峰值,减排路线的低碳情景可实现2020年达到排放峰值。 相似文献
5.
基于各国提交的165份国家自主贡献文件,以其中提出的减排目标为基准,尽可能充分地考虑了减排目标的范围不确定性、不同经济情景带来的碳强度减排目标不确定性、减排气体种类边界差异、碳排放达峰约束等因素,并通过蒙特卡洛模拟的方法对全球、各区域和主要经济体的温室气体排放总量、不确定度及其来源进行了定量分析。结果表明,到2030年全球温室气体排放总量将达到62.69 Gt CO2当量,其90%信度的置信区间为53.17~74.26 Gt CO2当量;由于未来经济总量预期不确定对排放量的影响最显著,因此,不同地区之间不确定性来源差异较大。同时,基于到2050年排放总量比2010年下降40%~70%的2℃目标排放情景,2030—2050年全球温室气体排放年均需要下降5.0% %。为了尽可能减小全球温室气体排放预期目标的不确定性和继续实现2℃目标,各国在进行自主贡献文件更新时进一步提出统计边界更为明确和统一且更有雄心的减排目标将是第一次全球盘点继续解决的重点问题。 相似文献
6.
需求侧减排是协同实现碳中和目标与民生福祉、社会公平改善的重要抓手,也是以“人”为中心连接不同可持续发展目标的关键纽带。IPCC第六次评估报告首次独立成章（第五章）介绍应对气候变化的需求侧解决方案。报告将需求侧减排与福祉、公平等目标关联起来,依循“避免-转变-改进（ASI）”的战略框架,梳理了需求侧的减排措施和减排潜力;揭示了社会文化、心理活动、技术水平和基础设施等因素对需求侧减排的关键驱动作用,指出多种驱动因素之间相互依赖,呈现叠加效应;明确了激发需求侧减排的动力和能力需要科学的行为干预和政策设计以推动系统性变革。文中对该章主要结论做扼要解读,同时就该章节对中国的相关研究和政策启示展开讨论。 相似文献
7.
碳交易政策的经济影响:以广东省为例 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
通过构建广东省两区域动态模型,对广东省碳交易及其他政策措施进行定量评估,分析实施可调控总量的碳交易政策机制对广东省及参与交易部门的经济影响。研究结果表明,按照减排情景到2015年广东完成19.5%的碳强度下降目标,相比基准情景,GDP将减少0.7%;按照强减排情景到2015年将完成20.5%的碳强度下降目标,相比基准情景GDP将减少0.9%;如果在强减排情景的基础上实施碳交易政策,GDP相对基准情景减少0.8%,到2015年实施碳交易政策可减少GDP损失约90亿元,说明广东建立碳排放权交易机制能够发挥支持经济发展和节能减碳双赢的作用。 相似文献
8.
全球长期减排目标将对世界未来的碳排放形成严重制约,减排义务的分担原则涉及各国的发展空间,事关根本利益。部分发达国家倡导人均排放趋同原则,回避发达国家的历史责任,中国等发展中国家提出人均累积排放趋同原则,强调公平性。按人均累积排放量计算,发达国家自工业革命以来的CO2排放量已远超出其到2050年前应有的限额,其当前和今后相当长时期的高人均排放都将继续挤占发展中国家的排放空间。因此,发达国家在哥本哈根会议的中近期减排承诺中必须深度减排,以实现全球长期减排目标下的排放轨迹,并为发展中国家留有必要的发展空间。同时必须对发展中国家给予充足的资金和技术支持,作为对其过度挤占发展中国家发展空间的补偿,使发展中国家能够在可持续发展框架下,提高应对气候变化的能力。我国在对外坚持公平原则,努力争取合理的排放空间的同时,对内要加强向低碳经济转型,努力实现保护全球气候和国内可持续发展的双赢。 相似文献
9.
王文军 《气候变化研究进展》2010,6(2):147-151
在《联合国气候变化框架公约》第15次缔约方会议召开前夕,德国发布了一份旨在通过对未来排放空间进行管理以实现长期减排目标、构建全球低碳经济的国际气候制度设计方案。该方案的研究思路与中国社会科学院学者提出的碳预算方案基本一致,但是两种方案在参数选择、减排路径、历史责任计算等问题上存在较大分歧。虽然德国方案力图平衡南北双方在气候领域的不同利益诉求,但从结果上看,德国方案明显有利于发达国家集团,公平性不足,难以达到其方案设计效果。 相似文献
10.
基于民航业特点及中国民航发展阶段,提出中国民航参与国家碳市场的框架性方案,重点对中国航空CO2排放总量控制目标设计及目标分解方案进行了论述,并从公平性和经济成本角度对所提方案进行分析。分析的结论是:方案不会在中国航空企业之间造成实质性竞争扭曲,不同情景下行业购买碳配额的成本每年增加1.7亿~14.3亿美元,若考虑中国民航至少60%的成本转嫁能力,方案不会对中国民航发展造成严重制约。 相似文献
11.
碳配额分配是碳排放控制的关键,在实现国家“双碳”目标下探寻更利于高质量发展的省级分配方案具有重要意义。基于平等主义、历史责任、支付能力、排放效率和可行性分配准则,使用综合指标法设计了10种分配方案,并以高质量发展为标准,使用Malmquist指数模型对这些方案进行评价。结果表明：我国各省份在不同分配方案下拥有多样化的碳配额,多数地区根据排放效率准则、支付能力准则、历史责任准则和可行性准则（方案F）获得最大配额。从国家层面看,方案F具有最佳的经济高质量发展性能,是相对最优的选择。从区域层面看,各省在不同分配方案下有不同的经济高质量发展表现,多数地区根据平等主义准则、排放效率准则和可行性准则（方案G）实现最优发展。排放效率指标的选取对分配方案的结果具有稳健性。 相似文献
12.
碳排放许可的强度分配标准与中国区域经济协调发展——基于30省区CGE模型的分析 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
基于30省区CGE模型,模拟分析了碳排放许可的强度分配标准对我国区域协调发展的影响。结果表明：按行业属性设定强度分配标准会加剧区域经济发展不平衡状况;按区域经济发展水平设定强度分配标准,对区域协调发展的影响较小,但会对高排放行业造成较大的冲击。中央政府基于强度分配标准,参考区域经济发展水平,将碳排放许可分配到各个省份,然后各个省份再参考行业特点将碳排放许可分配给机制覆盖行业的实体或排放源,这样的两阶段分配结构是较为现实的、具有可操作性的政策选择。 相似文献
13.
Over 40 studies that analyse future GHG emissions allowances or reduction targets for different regions based on a wide range of effort-sharing approaches and long-term concentration stabilization levels are compared. This updates previous work undertaken for the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Regional reduction targets differ significantly for each effort-sharing approach. For example, in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 1990 region, new proposals that emphasize the equity principles of responsibility, capability, and need, and those based on equal cumulative per capita emissions (carbon budgets), lead to relatively stringent emissions reduction targets. In order to reach a low concentration stabilization level of 450?ppm CO2e, the allowances under all effort sharing approaches in OECD1990 for 2030 would be approximately half of the emissions of 2010 with a large range, roughly two-thirds in the Economies in Transition (EIT), roughly at the 2010 emissions level or slightly below in Asia, slightly above the 2010 level in the Middle East and Africa and well below the 2010 level in Latin America. For 2050, allowances in OECD1990 and EIT would be a fraction of today's emissions, approximately half of 2010 emission levels in Asia, and possibly less than half of the 2010 level in Latin America.Policy relevanceThe concept of equity and the stringency of future national GHG reduction targets are at the heart of the current debate on the new international climate change agreement to be adopted in 2015. Policy insights gained from an analysis of over 40 studies, which have quantitatively analysed the proposed GHG reduction targets, are presented. It is found that the outcome of effort-sharing approaches is often largely determined by the way the equity principle is implemented and that the distributional impacts of such approaches can be significantly different depending on the criteria used, the stabilization level and shape of the global emissions pathway. However, the current literature only covers a small proportion of the possible allocation approaches. There should thus be an in-depth modelling comparison to ensure consistency and comparability of results and inform decision making regarding the reduction of GHG emissions. 相似文献
14.
为加快碳达峰、碳中和进程,中国正探索碳总量控制制度,而省域碳配额分配是落实总量控制目标的重要抓手。从分配准则、分配方法和分配结果3个环节对关于中国省域碳配额分配的研究开展综述。结果表明,兼顾公平和效率原则是各方研究共识,但对于公平原则的解读和测度尚存争议。指标法和优化法在省域碳配额分配中被广泛采用,前者能兼顾多方利益,后者能提升分配效率;混合法因具备多方法优势而具有较大发展潜力;博弈法因缺乏透明度而较为罕见。既有分配结果对各省分配的减排责任与各省实情间尚有差距,并仅关注某一特定年份当期或者某一时间区间内累计的碳配额分配,缺乏对逐年碳配额分配的关注。建议后续研究进一步关注兼顾公平与效率、考虑区域异质性与消费端排放责任、采用多方法组合、兼容个案特殊性的跨期动态分配方法学的构建过程。 相似文献
15.
《Climate Policy》2013,13(3):293-304
One problem in international climate policy is the refusal of large developing countries to accept emission reduction targets. Brazil, China and India together account for about 20% of today's CO2 emissions. We analyse the case in which there is no international agreement on emission reduction targets, but countries do have domestic targets, and trade permits across borders. We contrast two scenarios. In one scenario, Brazil, China and India adopt their business as usual emissions as their target. In this scenario, there are substantial exports of emission permits from developing to developed countries, and substantial economic gains for all. In the second scenario, Brazil, China and India reduce their emissions target so that they have no net economic gain from permit trade. Here, developing countries do not accept responsibility for climate change (as they bear no net costs), but they do contribute to an emission reduction policy by refusing to make money out of it. Adopting such break-even targets can be done at minor cost to developed and developing countries (roughly $2 bn/year each in extra costs and forgone benefits), while developing countries are still slightly better off than in the case without international emissions trade. This result is robust to variations in scenarios and parameters. It contrasts with Stewart and Wiener (2003) who propose granting ‘hot air’ to developing countries to seduce them to accept targets. In 2020, China and India could reduce their emissions by some 10% from the baseline without net economic costs. 相似文献
16.
This article gives a detailed account of part of the modelling that was carried out for the assessment of the EU's proposed energy and climate targets for 2030. Using the macro-econometric simulation model, E3ME, and drawing on results from the PRIMES energy systems model, it shows that a 40% reduction in GHG emissions (compared to 1990 levels) could lead to an increase in employment of up to 0.7 million jobs in Europe. Furthermore, if the same GHG reduction target was combined with targets for renewables and energy efficiency, the net increase in jobs could be as high as 1.2 million. Both results are in contrast to the standard findings from computable general equilibrium (CGE) models, reflecting the different underlying assumptions (e.g. labour supply) to the modelling approach. Additional sensitivity testing shows that the ways in which the energy efficiency and renewable measures are funded are important factors in determining overall economic impact.Policy relevanceIn recent years there has been much debate as to whether the European Union should have a single GHG reduction target or a set of targets that also cover renewables and energy efficiency. This paper elaborates on part of the modelling that was carried out for the official assessment of the European Union's proposed energy and climate targets for 2030. Using an empirical, model-based approach, it compares a scenario where there is a single 40% GHG reduction target to a scenario that also includes a 30% renewables target and stricter energy efficiency standards. The model results show that the large investment stimulus needed to meet the combined targets leads to higher levels of GDP and employment. This suggests that there could be medium-term economic and social benefits to including all three targets in the future energy and climate package. 相似文献
17.
Abstract In the long term, the Kyoto Protocol will be insufficient to stabilize the greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere; quantified commitments will also be essential for major developing countries (and the US). International cooperation mechanisms, such as permit trading systems, can help achieve global economic efficiency. However, the initial allocation of emission permits raises many debates on equity. The main objective is to propose a decision aid tool for decision makers, which is capable of providing relevant information on various equitable permit allocation schemes and burden sharing. A dynamic multicriteria model is proposed to share the global quantity of permits among 15 regions, taking into account multiple definitions of equity and regional interests. The World-MARKAL energy model is used to compute the gross reduction cost (before permit exchanges) for each region. Afterward, it is possible to calculate their net reduction costs (after permit exchanges) according to different allocation schemes. A realistic simulation of the tool provides examples of results, i.e. ranges of permit allocations and net costs for each region. Finally, some recommendations are proposed to policy makers to design a decision process adapted to the global context of negotiations. 相似文献
18.
《Climate Policy》2013,13(3):247-260
In order to stabilize long-term greenhouse gas concentrations at 450 ppm CO2-eq or lower, developed countries as a group should reduce emissions by 25–40% below 1990 levels by 2020, while developing countries' emissions need to be reduced by around 15–30%, relative to their baseline levels, according to the IPCC and our earlier work. This study examines 19 other studies on the emission reductions attributed to the developed and developing countries for meeting a 450 ppm target. These studies considered different allocation approaches, according to equity principles. The effect of the assumed global emissions cap in these studies is analysed. For developed countries, the original reduction range of 25–40% by 2020 is still within the average range of all studies, but does not cover it completely. Comparing the studies shows that assuming a global emissions cap of 5–15% above 1990 levels by 2020 generally leads to more stringent reduction targets than when a global emissions cap of 20–30% above 1990 levels is assumed. For developing countries, the reduction range of 15–30% below their baseline levels by 2020 corresponds to an increase on the 1990 level from 70% (about the 2006 level) to 120%. Reducing deforestation emissions by 50% below baseline levels by 2020 may relax the emission reductions for either group of countries; for developing countries by about 7% or for developed countries by about 15% (but not for both). 相似文献