Industrial Energy Consumption and Carbon Emission Decoupling Study and Driving Factor Analysis: A Case Study of Sichuan Province, China

Weiguo Tang; Yi Ding

doi:10.62051/ijnres.v6n2.07

Authors

Weiguo Tang
Yi Ding

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62051/ijnres.v6n2.07

Keywords:

Energy Consumption; Industrial Carbon Emissions; STIRPAT Model; Driving Factor

Abstract

The carbon emission of industrial energy consumption has an important impact on a region's carbon emission reduction and optimization of carbon emission path. Based on the STIRPAT model and the TAPIO decoupling model, this study analyzes the driving factors and decoupling relationship between carbon emissions from industrial energy consumption and economic growth in Sichuan Province. The research shows that: (1) The industrial carbon emissions in Sichuan Province are increasing first and then decreasing, with an increase of 18.78% from 2005 to 2022, and the carbon emission intensity has decreased from 1.94 tons/10,000 yuan to 0.29 tons/10,000 yuan; (2) The decoupling relationship between industrial carbon emissions and economic growth in Sichuan Province presents three development periods, mainly strong decoupling and weak decoupling. According to the decomposition factors, the decoupling relationship between industrial carbon emissions and economic development is mainly affected by the decoupling coefficient of value creation and emission reduction; (3) The proportion of secondary industry, the number of industrial enterprises, and the total industrial assets are the main carbon promoting factors of industrial carbon emission in Sichuan Province, with elastic coefficients of 0.097, 0.057 and 0.040 respectively; population size is a carbon reduction factor with an elastic coefficient of -0.087. Finally, the study puts forward some suggestions to realize industrial carbon emission reduction.

References

[1]Jiajia P, Lianshui L. Analysis of factors affecting industrial carbon dioxide emissions in China. Environmental Science and Technology. 2011, 34(04): 86-92. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6504.2011.04.019.

[2]Ping Q, Caihong M. Spatial and temporal dynamics of carbon emissions from energy consumption in China. Journal of Southwest University (Natural Science Edition). 2019, 41(10): 93-100. doi: 10.13718/j.cnki.xdzk.2019.10.013.

[3]Sarolta Somosi, Gábor Dávid Kiss, Shahi Md Tanvir Alam. Examination of carbon dioxide emissions and renewables in Southeast Asian countries based on a panel vector autoregressive model. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2024, Vol.436: 140174. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140174.

[4]Bosah Philip Chukwunonso, Ibrahim Al-Wesabi, Li Shixiang, et al. Predicting carbon dioxide emissions in the United States of America using machine learning algorithms. Environmental science and pollution research international. 2024, Vol.31(23): 33685-33707. doi: 10.1007/s11356-024-33460-1.

[5]Xuepei Y, Jianyun H, Runsheng Y, et al. Assessing the carbon offsetting potential of China’s forest sector: reflection and outlook. Carbon Management. 2023, Vol.14(1): 2266671. doi: 10.1080/17583004.2023.2266671.

[6]Zhen Y, Jiabei Z, Huxiao Z, et al. Decoupling and decomposition of emissions and economic growth in Guangdong: A perspective of embodied carbon flow. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2024, Vol.459: 142518. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142518.

[7]Azam Muhammad, Younes Ben Zaied, et al. Integrated Spatial-Temporal decomposition analysis for life cycle assessment of carbon emission intensity change in various regions of China. Resources Policy. 2022, Vol.79: 103062. doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.103062.

[8]Hongjiang L, Fengying Y. Quantitative analysis of impact factors and scenario prediction of energy related carbon emissions at county level. International Journal of Green Energy. 2022, Vol. 20(12): 1342-1351. doi: 10.1080/15435075.2022.2110379.

[9]Irene M. Zarco-Soto, Pedro J. Zarco-Periñán, Rafael Sánchez-Durán. Influence of cities population size on their energy consumption and CO2 emissions: the case of Spain. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2021, Vol. 28(22): 28146-28167. doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-12624-3.

[10]Xi Z, Jiangtao D, Steve Sharples. A parametric analysis of future climate change effects on the energy performance and carbon emissions of a Chinese prefabricated timber house. Building Services Engineering Research and Technology. 2023, Vol.44(2): 167-185. doi: 10.1177/01436244221143308.

[11]Songbo J, Xiaowen Z, Xin Gao, et al. The influence of carbon emission trading on the optimization of regional energy structure. Heliyon. 2024, Vol.10(11): e31706. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31706.

[12]Humaira Y, Ying W, Hashim Z, et al. Decomposing Factors Affecting CO2 Emissions in Pakistan: Insights From LMDI Decomposition Approach. Environmental science and pollution research international. 2020, Vol.27(3): 3113-3123. doi: 10.1007/s11356-019-07187-3.

[13]Djula Borozan. Do geopolitical and energy security risks influence carbon dioxide emissions? Empirical evidence from European Union countries. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2024, Vol. 439: 140834. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.140834.

[14]Gnanba Joelle Loïc Abro, Francis Kyere, Doris Laure Bakam, et al. The impact of urbanization and economic growth on carbon dioxide emission in sub-Saharan African countries: a perspective from the spatial-temporal approach. Environmental science and pollution research international. 2024, Vol. 31(21): 31240-31258. doi: 10.1007/s11356-024-33274-1.

[15]Li X, Zhang J, Zhang W, et al. Spatial Heterogeneity Analysis of Factors on Commuting Carbon Emissions: Evidence from the Shenzhen Metropolitan Area in China. Sustainability. 2024,16(11). doi: 10.3390/su16114397.

[16]Xie P, Lu Y, Xie Y. The Influencing Factors of Carbon Emissions in the Industrial Sector: Empirical Analysis Based on a Spatial Econometric Model. Sustainability.2024,16(6). doi: 10.3390/su16062478.

[17]Ebrahim Abbas Abdullah Abbas Amer, Ebrahim Mohammed Ali Meyad, et al. Impacts of renewable and disaggregated non-renewable energy consumption on CO2 emissions in GCC countries: A STIRPAT model analysis. Heliyon. 2024, Vol. 10(9): e30154. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30154.

[18]Peijiong F, Yan G, Yaguai Y, et al. Scenario analysis on co-benefits of air pollution control and carbon reduction in Yangtze River Delta based on STIRPAT model. PloS one. 2024, Vol. 19(1): e0296915. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296915.

[19]Mingjun D, Shihu Z, Guocheng X. Carbon emission reduction effect of China's final demand structure change from 2013 to 2020: a scenario-based analysis. Carbon Management. 2019, Vol. 10(4): 387-404. doi: 10.1080/17583004.2019.1620036.

[20]Misbah Nosheen, Muhammad Ali, Abbasi, et al. Analyzing extended STIRPAT model of urbanization and CO2 emissions in Asian countries. Environmental science and pollution research international. 2020, Vol. 27(36): 45911-45924. doi: 10.1007/s11356-020-10276-3.

[21]Lei W, Yang C. Influencing factors analysis and forecasting of residential energy-related CO2 emissions utilizing optimized support vector machine. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2020, Vol. 250: 119492. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119492.

[22]Yangyang H, Zhenxiang W. The relationship between industrial carbon emissions and economic growth-an empirical study based on speed decoupling and quantity decoupling. Journal of Natural Science of Hunan Normal University. 2021,44(05): 19-29. doi: 10.7612/j.issn.2096-5281.2021.05.003.

[23]Zhe Z, Ayyoob Sharifi. Analysis of decoupling between CO2 emissions and economic growth in China's provincial capital cities: A Tapio model approach. Urban Climate. 2024, Vol. 55: 101885. doi: 10.1016/j.uclim.2024.101885.

[24]Yasmeen H, Tan Q. Assessing Pakistan''s energy use, environmental degradation, and economic progress based on Tapio decoupling model. Environmental science and pollution research international. 2021, Vol. 28(48): 68364-68378. doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-15416-x.

[25]Xiaopeng G, Rong S, Dongfang R. Reduce carbon emissions efficiently: The influencing factors and decoupling relationships of carbon emission from high-energy consumption and high-emission industries in China. Energy & Environment. Vol.35(3): 1416-1433. doi: 10.1177/0958305X221140567.

[26]Qinmei W, Yangyang Z, Weibo L. Decoupling analysis of carbon emissions and economic growth in three provinces in central China-empirical evidence based on LYQ framework. East China Economic Management. 2013, (7): 54-57. doi: 1007-5097（2013）07-0054-04.

[27]Qifan G. Decomposing and Decoupling the Energy-Related Carbon Emissions in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Region Using the Extended LMDI and Tapio Index Model. Sustainability. 2023, Vol.15(12): 9681. doi: 10.3390/su15129681.

[28]Kangkang T, Shuyu S. Multi-dimensional decoupling analysis in the context of energy use: Dynamic well-being, resource, and impact decoupling relationships in China. Applied Energy. 2024, Vol. 359: 122726. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.122726.

[29]Miao W, Xinmin Z, Chao F, et al. Towards a sustainable construction: A newly proposed Tapio-global meta-frontier DEA framework for decoupling China's construction economy from its carbon emissions. The Science of the total environment. 2024, Vol.929: 172727. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.172727.

[30]Petri Tapio. Towards a theory of decoupling: degrees of decoupling in the EU and the case of road traffic in Finland between 1970 and 2001. Transport Policy.2005, Vol.12(2): 137-151. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.01.001.