| Literature DB >> 30190515 |
Jie Pei1,2, Zheng Niu3,4, Li Wang5,6, Xiao-Peng Song7, Ni Huang1, Jing Geng2,8, Yan-Bin Wu9, Hong-Hui Jiang10.
Abstract
This study analysed spatial-temporal dynamics of carbon emissions and carbon sinks in Guangdong Province, South China. The methodology was based on land use/land cover data interpreted from continuous high-resolution satellite images and energy consumption statistics, using carbon emission/sink factor method. The results indicated that: (1) From 2005 to 2013, different land use/land cover types in Guangdong experienced varying degrees of change in area, primarily the expansion of built-up land and shrinkage of forest land and grassland; (2) Total carbon emissions increased sharply, from 76.11 to 140.19 TgC yr-1 at the provincial level, with an average annual growth rate of 10.52%, while vegetation carbon sinks declined slightly, from 54.52 to 53.20 TgC yr-1. Both factors showed significant regional differences, with Pearl River Delta and North Guangdong contributing over 50% to provincial carbon emissions and carbon sinks, respectively; (3) Correlation analysis showed social-economic factors (GDP per capita and permanent resident population) have significant positive impacts on carbon emissions at the provincial and city levels; (4) The relationship between economic growth and carbon emission intensity suggests that carbon emission efficiency in Guangdong improves with economic growth. This study provides new insight for Guangdong to achieve carbon reduction goals and realize low-carbon development.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30190515 PMCID: PMC6127195 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-31733-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Location of Guangdong Province in China, and the economic geographical division of Guangdong. Map created using ArcGIS [9.3], (http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis).
Land use transition matrix of Guangdong Province between 2005 and 2013 (km2).
| 2013 | Cropland | Forest land | Grassland | Built-up land | Water bodies | Barren land | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | |||||||
| Cropland | 1224.15 | 94.32 | 2096.09 | 642.74 | 2.81 | 40119.10 | |
| Forest land | 2317.95 | 228.42 | 1510.40 | 226.51 | 37.92 | 106065.27 | |
| Grassland | 291.23 | 932.48 | 281.08 | 49.14 | 13.99 | 8919.12 | |
| Built-up land | 1008.50 | 267.87 | 16.72 | 222.71 | 1.60 | 12354.11 | |
| Water bodies | 288.20 | 136.10 | 11.12 | 492.00 | 0.51 | 8207.28 | |
| Barren land | 12.07 | 99.62 | 0.88 | 35.08 | 27.27 | 298.33 | |
| Total | 39976.94 | 104404.30 | 7702.66 | 15251.36 | 8447.74 |
Figure 2Temporal changes of provincial carbon emissions and vegetation carbon sinks from 2005–2013. Bars represent annual quantity of carbon emissions on new built-up land and cropland. Line represents annual carbon sinks contributed by forest land and grassland.
Calculation results of carbon emissions, vegetation carbon sinks, and carbon emissions intensity (CEI) on the provincial scale from 2005–2013.
| Year | C emissions on new built-up land (TgC yr−1) | C emissions on cropland (TgC yr−1) | C sink from forest land (TgC yr−1) | C sink from grassland (TgC yr−1) | Total C emissions (TgC yr−1) | Total C sinks (TgC yr−1) | Ratio of total C emissions to sinks | Net C emissions (TgC yr−1) | CEI per unit land area (MgC yr−1 ha−1) | CEI per unit GDP (MgC yr−1 10−4 USD) | Per capita C emissions (MgC yr−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 63.74 | 12.37 | 50.83 | 3.69 | 76.11 | 54.52 | 1.40 | 21.59 | 4.32 | 2.76 | 0.83 |
| 2006 | 73.33 | 11.96 | 50.71 | 3.67 | 85.29 | 54.38 | 1.57 | 30.91 | 4.84 | 2.56 | 0.92 |
| 2007 | 85.63 | 12.11 | 50.24 | 3.67 | 97.74 | 53.90 | 1.81 | 43.84 | 5.55 | 2.34 | 1.03 |
| 2008 | 86.61 | 12.22 | 50.18 | 3.66 | 98.83 | 53.83 | 1.84 | 45.00 | 5.62 | 1.87 | 1.04 |
| 2009 | 92.78 | 12.40 | 49.53 | 3.62 | 105.17 | 53.15 | 1.98 | 52.02 | 5.98 | 1.82 | 1.04 |
| 2010 | 111.01 | 12.48 | 50.12 | 3.39 | 123.49 | 53.51 | 2.31 | 69.99 | 7.01 | 1.82 | 1.18 |
| 2011 | 125.56 | 12.64 | 50.10 | 3.26 | 138.20 | 53.36 | 2.59 | 84.84 | 7.84 | 1.68 | 1.32 |
| 2012 | 121.29 | 12.76 | 50.06 | 3.22 | 134.05 | 53.27 | 2.52 | 80.77 | 7.62 | 1.48 | 1.27 |
| 2013 | 127.49 | 12.70 | 50.01 | 3.19 | 140.19 | 53.20 | 2.64 | 86.99 | 7.96 | 1.40 | 1.32 |
Figure 3The mean and standard deviations of carbon emissions and vegetation carbon sinks of different regions in Guangdong Province between 2005 and 2013. The red and blue bars represent the mean value of carbon emissions and carbon sinks, respectively, with vertical bars representing + one standard deviation. GD: Guangdong Province; PRD: Pearl River Delta; EGD: East Guangdong; WGD: West Guangdong; NGD: North Guangdong.
Figure 4Regional comparisons of carbon emissions and vegetation carbon sinks. (a) Annual carbon emissions in Pearl River Delta (PRD) and non-PRD regions (i.e. East Guangdong, West Guangdong and North Guangdong). The red and blue bars represent carbon emissions of PRD and non-PRD, respectively. (b) Annual vegetation carbon sinks in North Guangdong (NGD) and non-NGD (i.e. Pearl River Delta, East Guangdong, and West Guangdong). The green and purple bars represent carbon sinks of NGD and non-NGD, respectively.
Calculation results of carbon emissions, vegetation carbon sinks, and carbon emissions intensity (CEI) on the city scale in 2013.
| City | C emissions on new built-up land (TgC yr−1) | C emissions on cropland (TgC yr−1) | C sinks from forest land (TgC yr−1) | C sinks from grassland (TgC yr−1) | Total C emissions (TgC yr−1) | Total C sinks (TgC yr−1) | Ratio of total C emissions to sinks | Net C emissions (TgC yr−1) | CEI per unit land area (MgC yr−1 ha−1) | CEI per unit GDP (MgC yr−1 10−4 USD) | Per capita C emissions (MgC yr−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guangzhou | 13.01 | 0.50 | 1.43 | 0.05 | 13.51 | 1.48 | 9.12 | 12.03 | 19.01 | 0.54 | 1.05 |
| Shenzhen | 8.22 | 0.02 | 0.31 | 0.02 | 8.24 | 0.33 | 25.05 | 7.91 | 44.90 | 0.35 | 0.78 |
| Foshan | 11.02 | 0.15 | 0.38 | 0.01 | 11.17 | 0.39 | 28.39 | 10.77 | 28.77 | 0.99 | 1.53 |
| Zhuhai | 3.08 | 0.05 | 0.22 | 0.00 | 3.13 | 0.22 | 14.09 | 2.91 | 22.07 | 1.17 | 1.97 |
| Dongguan | 10.07 | 0.06 | 0.30 | 0.01 | 10.13 | 0.31 | 32.65 | 9.82 | 42.32 | 1.14 | 1.22 |
| Zhongshan | 4.94 | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.00 | 5.01 | 0.16 | 30.75 | 4.85 | 30.50 | 1.18 | 1.58 |
| Huizhou | 8.72 | 0.63 | 3.46 | 0.15 | 9.35 | 3.61 | 2.59 | 5.75 | 8.28 | 2.16 | 1.99 |
| Jiangmen | 7.54 | 0.96 | 2.12 | 0.15 | 8.50 | 2.27 | 3.75 | 6.23 | 9.22 | 2.63 | 1.89 |
| Zhaoqing | 4.88 | 0.90 | 5.30 | 0.09 | 5.79 | 5.39 | 1.07 | 0.40 | 3.90 | 2.16 | 1.44 |
| Shantou | 4.20 | 0.25 | 0.26 | 0.07 | 4.45 | 0.33 | 13.48 | 4.12 | 21.64 | 1.76 | 0.81 |
| Chaozhou | 2.55 | 0.22 | 0.68 | 0.19 | 2.77 | 0.87 | 3.17 | 1.90 | 8.98 | 2.20 | 1.02 |
| Jieyang | 4.53 | 0.51 | 1.14 | 0.20 | 5.04 | 1.34 | 3.77 | 3.70 | 9.69 | 1.94 | 0.84 |
| Shanwei | 2.94 | 0.44 | 1.02 | 0.28 | 3.38 | 1.30 | 2.61 | 2.08 | 7.10 | 3.11 | 1.13 |
| Zhanjiang | 10.08 | 1.71 | 1.84 | 0.01 | 11.79 | 1.85 | 6.36 | 9.94 | 9.90 | 3.55 | 1.65 |
| Maoming | 6.38 | 1.11 | 3.34 | 0.13 | 7.49 | 3.47 | 2.16 | 4.03 | 6.63 | 2.15 | 1.25 |
| Yangjiang | 4.01 | 0.76 | 1.98 | 0.10 | 4.77 | 2.08 | 2.30 | 2.69 | 6.21 | 2.84 | 1.92 |
| Shaoguan | 3.98 | 0.95 | 6.42 | 0.34 | 4.93 | 6.76 | 0.73 | −1.83 | 2.70 | 3.02 | 1.70 |
| Meizhou | 4.89 | 0.89 | 5.60 | 0.47 | 5.78 | 6.07 | 0.95 | −0.28 | 3.66 | 4.48 | 1.34 |
| Qingyuan | 7.12 | 1.06 | 6.09 | 0.47 | 8.18 | 6.56 | 1.25 | 1.62 | 4.33 | 4.64 | 2.16 |
| Heyuan | 3.44 | 0.84 | 5.50 | 0.30 | 4.28 | 5.80 | 0.74 | −1.52 | 2.74 | 3.89 | 1.41 |
| Yunfu | 3.56 | 0.56 | 2.45 | 0.17 | 4.12 | 2.62 | 1.57 | 1.50 | 5.30 | 4.24 | 1.70 |
It is worth noting that “City” in this study is second only to the administrative division of the province.
Figure 5Results of correlation analysis between carbon emissions and social-economic factors. (a) Correlation between GDP per capita and annual carbon emissions at the provincial level. (b) Correlation between permanent resident population and annual carbon emissions at the provincial level. (c) Correlation between GDP per capita and carbon emissions at the city level in 2013. (d) Correlation between permanent resident population and carbon emissions at the city level in 2013. Two-tailed test of significance was used in the analysis.
Figure 6Results of regression analysis between economic growth and carbon emissions intensity. (a) Fitted curve between GDP per capita and CEI per unit GDP on the provincial scale from 2005–2013; (b) Fitted curve between GDP per capita and CEI per unit GDP on the city scale in 2013. The unit of Y-axis in (a) and (b) is MgC yr−1 10−4 USD.