| Literature DB >> 35329153 |
Shiping Ma1,2, Qianqian Liu3,4, Wenzhong Zhang1,2.
Abstract
Promoting technological advancements and energy transitions in electricity generation are crucial for achieving carbon reduction goals. Some studies have examined the effectiveness of these measures by analysing the driving forces of "aggregate carbon intensity" (ACI) change. However, only a few studies have considered the effect of the installed capacity mix and capacity factor. Moreover, such analysis has never been applied at China's provincial level after 2015. To alleviate this gap, our study applied a temporal and multi-regional spatial IDA-LMDI model to analyse the driving factors of ACI changes and disparities among the provinces of China from 2005 to 2019. The model notably includes the effects of the installed capacity mix, thermal capacity factor, and overall capacity factor. The analysis revealed that the decline in China's ACI was diminished after 2015, while an ACI rebound was identified in five provinces. The changes in the ACI from 2015 to 2019 were mainly driven by the effect of the installed capacity mix rather than by the thermal efficiency and thermal capacity factor. The overall capacity factor was the only factor with a negative impact on the ACI change. We also found that its combined effect with the thermal capacity factor on increasing ACI can offset the effect of the installed capacity mix by reducing the ACI in provinces with significant additions of renewable energy installed capacity. The analysis of the influencing factors on the provincial ACI differences revealed that the share of hydropower installed capacity was significant. Moreover, the thermal efficiency and thermal capacity factor both played key roles in the ACI disparities in northeast, northwest, and central China. Overall, this study paves the way for data-driven measures of China's carbon peak and carbon neutrality goals by improving the capacity factor of wind and solar power, leveraging the critical impact of hydropower, and narrowing the differences in the thermal power sector among provinces.Entities:
Keywords: aggregate carbon intensity; capacity factor; electricity generation; installed capacity mix; provincial level
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35329153 PMCID: PMC8951601 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19063471
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Emission Coefficient Factor.
| Raw Coal | Oil | Natural Gas | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average calorific value (kjoule/kg, kj/cu.m) | 20,908 | 41,816 | 35,585 |
| Carbon content (t·C/TJ) | 26.37 | 20.08 | 15.32 |
| Fraction of carbon oxidised | 95% | 98% | 99% |
| Conversion factor (kgce/kg, kgce/cu.m) | 0.71 | 1.43 | 1.22 |
| 2.69 | 2.11 | 1.63 |
Statistical information of provincial ACI.
| V(g·CO2/kWh) | 2005 | 2010 | 2015 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Max | 1141.24 | 1030.87 | 962.72 | 936.00 |
| Min | 319.37 | 207.41 | 102.66 | 84.46 |
| Range | 821.97 | 823.46 | 860.06 | 851.54 |
| S.D. | 219.06 | 213.22 | 242.10 | 221.49 |
Figure 1The spatial distribution of provincial ACI in China.
Figure 2Performance of driving factors in provincial temporal IDA-LMDI.
Figure 3Performance of respective effects of different kinds of non-fossil power.
Figure 4The change in China’s capacity factors.
Figure 5Relationship between the effect of installed capacity mix and capacity factors from 2015 to 2019.
Ratio and rate of non-fossil installed capacity growth in selected provinces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hainan | 0.64% | 0.14% | 0.70% | 8.06 | −0.03% | 0.94 | 2.41% | 2.48 |
| Shaanxi | 4.62% | 2.54% | 5.38% | 13.04 | 5.33% | 4.67 | 3.28% | 1.47 |
| Hebei | 7.26% | 7.84% | 7.77% | 6.64 | 7.87% | 1.60 | 0.00% | 1.00 |
| Henan | 5.19% | 3.80% | 6.29% | 25.71 | 8.96% | 8.73 | 0.24% | 1.02 |
| Jiangxi | 3.10% | 1.37% | 3.64% | 14.65 | 2.79% | 4.27 | 4.48% | 1.35 |
| Shanxi | 5.36% | 5.98% | 6.07% | 9.80 | 7.42% | 1.87 | −0.55% | 0.91 |
| Jilin | 1.35% | 2.66% | 1.66% | 39.14 | 1.44% | 1.25 | 1.78% | 1.18 |
| Anhui | 6.17% | 1.31% | 7.03% | 10.36 | 1.76% | 2.01 | 1.42% | 1.19 |
| Shandong | 7.97% | 6.47% | 9.23% | 12.17 | 8.07% | 1.88 | 0.00% | 1.00 |
| Jiangsu | 7.32% | 4.98% | 6.61% | 3.52 | 8.02% | 2.53 | 3.96% | 2.32 |
| Zhejiang | 6.59% | 0.76% | 7.29% | 8.16 | 0.71% | 1.54 | 4.40% | 1.17 |
| China | 100.00% | 100.00% | 100.00% | 4.83 | 100.00% | 1.60 | 100.00% | 1.12 |
Figure 6Performance of driving factors in spatial IDA-LMDI decomposition.
Figure 7Share of power installed capacity from different primary energies in 2019.