“全碳排”核算与碳绩效评价方法研究

doi:10.13209/j.0479-8023.2015.073

北京大学学报（自然科学版） ›› 2015, Vol. 51 ›› Issue (4): 639-646.DOI: 10.13209/j.0479-8023.2015.073

“全碳排”核算与碳绩效评价方法研究

张雪花¹;李响¹;叶文虎²;张宝安³

1. 天津工业大学环境经济研究所, 天津300387; 2. 北京大学中国持续发展研究中心, 北京100871; 3. 中国环境管理干部学院, 秦皇岛066004;

收稿日期:2014-03-13 修回日期:2014-05-16 出版日期:2015-07-20 发布日期:2015-07-20
张雪花
基金资助:
国家社会科学基金(12BJY025)和国家自然科学基金(41201591)资助

Calculation of Full Carbon Emission and Evaluation of Carbon Emission Performance

ZHANG Xuehua¹;LI Xiang¹;YE Wenhu²;ZHANG Baoan³

1. Department of Environmental Economics, Tianjin Polytechnic University, Tianjin 300387; 2. China Sustainable Development Research Center, Peking University, Beijing 100871; 3. Environmental Management College of China, Qinhuangdao 066004;

Received:2014-03-13 Revised:2014-05-16 Online:2015-07-20 Published:2015-07-20
About author:ZHANG Xuehua

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 提出“全碳排”核算方法, 其核算账户包括能源消耗碳排放、生物质资源消费潜在碳耗用和废弃物排放潜在碳耗用; 以太阳能值为量纲归一化工具, 进行全碳排放量核算; 以全碳排核算为基础, 综合考虑单位碳排人口承载量、单位碳排经济产出量和单位碳排人均可支配收入获取量等信息, 构建能够反映碳效率和发展协调度的碳排放绩效综合指数, 以衡量一个地区的碳绩效。以北京市和重庆市为例, 评价2001—2011 年间的碳排放综合绩效。结果显示: 两个城市的能源消耗碳排在全碳排总量中所占比重不断上升, 可见即使从全碳排视角来看, 能源消费仍是影响碳排放的最主要因素; 两个城市三个方面的分指标值差异较大, 可见不同的生产水平对碳排影响不容忽视; 较之仅考虑能源碳排及碳生产率的传统碳效率评估, 基于“全碳排”核算的碳综合绩效评价, 可以更为公平客观地反映一个地区的碳绩效, 为地区碳减排责任认定提供科学参考。

关键词: 全碳排核算, 碳绩效评价, 能值转换, 碳减排责任

Abstract: A full carbon emission calculation method is proposed, whose accounts include energy consumption carbon emission, potential carbon consumption of biomass resource consumption, and potential carbon consumption of waste emission. The solar emergy is used as a tool of the same normalized dimension for calculating the amount of full carbon emission. Based on the full carbon emission calculation, population carrying capacity of one unit carbon emission, economic output of one unit carbon emission, and per capita disposable income of one unit carbon emission are considered into one package to construct an index to evaluate the carbon efficiency and development coordination level of a region, and the index is named carbon emission performance integrated index. Taking Beijing and Chongqing as examples, an assessment is made from 2001 to 2011 with the result that the proportion of energy consumption carbon emission in the full carbon emission of the two cities is raised continuously, which indicates that even in the view of full carbon emission, energy consumption is still the main factor affecting carbon emission; however, the effects from modes of both life and production on carbon emission also cannot be neglected. Compared with the traditional carbon efficiency evaluation with only energy carbon emission and carbon production rate considered, the carbon integrated performance evaluation based on “full carbon emission calculation” can fairly and objectively reflect carbon performance of a region, thus it provides a scientific method to identify the responsibility of regional carbon emission reduction.

Key words: full carbon emission calculation, carbon performance evaluation, emergy transmission, responsibility of carbon emission reduction

中图分类号:

X820
F205

张雪花;李响;叶文虎;张宝安. “全碳排”核算与碳绩效评价方法研究[J]. 北京大学学报（自然科学版）, 2015, 51(4): 639-646.

ZHANG Xuehua;LI Xiang;YE Wenhu;ZHANG Baoan. Calculation of Full Carbon Emission and Evaluation of Carbon Emission Performance[J]. , 2015, 51(4): 639-646.

参考文献

[1] 布朗·B. 模式4·0: 起来, 拯救文明. 上海: 上海科技教育出版社, 2010: 63–65
[2] Urban and Regional Carbon Management. What is urban and regional carbon management? [EB/OL] (2013?03?13) [2014?05?16]. http://www.gcp-urcm. org/Main/HomePage 张雪花等 “全碳排”核算与碳绩效评价方法研究 645
[3] 朱远, 刘国平. “金砖四国”碳排放绩效比较研究. 亚太经济, 2011(5): 78–83
[4] 王萱, 宋德勇. 碳排放阶段划分与国际经验启示. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2013, 23(5): 46–51
[5] Mielnik O, Goldemberg J. Communication the evolution of the “carbonization index” in developing countries. Energy Policy, 1999, 27(5): 307–308
[6] Ang B W. Is the energy intensity a less useful indicator than the carbon factor in the study of climate change?. Energy Policy, 1999, 27(15): 943– 946
[7] Sun J W. The decrease of CO2 emission intensity is decarbonization at national and global levels. Energy Policy, 2005, 33(8): 975–978
[8] Zhang Z, Qu J, Zeng J. A quantitative comparison and analysis on the assessment indicators of greenhouse gases emission. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2008, 18(4): 387–399
[9] Edgar G H, Glen P P. Carbon footprint of nations: a global, trade-linked analysis. Environ Sci Technol, 2009, 43(16): 6414–6420
[10] 潘家华, 庄贵阳, 郑艳, 等. 低碳经济的概念辨识及核心要素分析. 国际经济评论, 2010(4): 88–101
[11] 诸大建. 中国低碳经济蓝皮书. 上海: 同济大学出版社, 2012
[12] 臧漫丹, 诸大建, 刘国平. 生态福利绩效: 概念、内涵及G20 实证. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2013, 5: 118–124
[13] Tungodden B. Responsibility and redistribution: the case of first-best taxation. Social Choice and Welfare, 2005, 24: 33–44
[14] 吴静, 马晓哲, 王铮. 我国省市自治区碳排放权配额研究. 第四纪研究, 2010, 30(3): 481–488
[15] Munksgaard J, Pedersen K A. CO2 accounts for open economies: producer or consumer responsibility?. Energy Policy, 2001, 29(4): 327–334
[16] Shui B, Harriss R C. The role of CO2 embodiment in US-China trade. Energy Policy, 2006, 34(18): 4063– 4068
[17] Zhang X H, Li L, Li J, et al．Calculation model of “full carbon efficiency” based on emergy. Advances in Information Sciences and Service Sciences, 2012, 4(23): 525?530
[18] 王智新, 梁翠, 赵景峰. 科技投入绩效、制度环境与碳排放强度. 科学管理研究, 2012, 30(6): 109–112
[19] 王伟林, 黄贤金. 区域碳排放强度变化的因素分解模型及实证分析: 以江苏省为例. 生态经济, 2008 (12): 32–35
[20] 陈武, 常燕, 李云峰. 中国碳足迹的国际比较研究. 中国科技论坛, 2013, (3) 138–144
[21] 孙建卫, 陈志刚, 赵荣钦, 等. 基于投入产出分析的中国碳排放足迹研究. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2010, 20(5): 28–34
[22] Odum H T. Self-organization, transformity and information. Science, 1988, 242: 1132–1139
[23] Odum H T. Environmental accounting: EMERGY and environmental decision making. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1996
[24] Ulgiati S, Odum H T, Bastianoni S. Energy Use, environmental loading and sustainability: an energy analysis of Italy. Ecological Modelling, 1994, 73: 215–268
[25] 蓝盛芳, 钦佩. 生态系统的能值分析. 应用生态学报, 2001, 12(1): 129–131
[26] Chen B, Chen G Q. Ecological footprint accounting based on emergy — a case study of the Chinese society. Ecological Modelling, 2006, 198: 101–114
[27] Valsson T, Ulfarsson G F, Gardarsson S M. A theory of the evolution of settlement structures based on identification and use of patterns: Iceland as a case study. Futures, 2013, 54 (11): 19–32
[28] 刘耕源, 杨志峰, 陈彬. 基于能值分析方法的城市代谢过程研究: 理论与方法. 生态学报, 2013, 33(15): 4539–4551
[29] 李宏. 大自然的报复. 沈阳: 辽海出版社, 2013
[30] Cuéllar A D, Webber M E. Wasted food, wasted energy: the embedded energy in food waste in the United States. Environ Sci Technol, 2010, 44(16): 6464–6469
[31] 蓝盛芳, 钦佩, 陆宏芳. 生态·环境与生态工程丛书: 生态经济系统能. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2002
[32] 陆宏芳, 沈善瑞, 陈洁, 等. 生态经济系统的一种整合评价方法: 能值理论与分析方法. 生态环境, 2005, 14(1): 121–126
[33] 张雪花, 李建, 张宏伟. 基于能值–生态足迹整合模型的城市生态性评价方法研究: 以天津市为例. 北京大学学报: 自然科学版, 2011, 47(2): 344–352
[34] 张延安, 郑昭佩, 张文岚. 基于能值改进的生态足迹模型在济南市的应用分析. 资源环境与发展, 2010(1): 27–31
[35] Lenzen M, Murray S A. A modified ecological footprint method and its application to Australia. Ecological Economics, 2001, 37: 229–255
[36] Common M S, Salma U. Accounting for changes in Australian carbon dioxide emissions. Energy Econ, 1992, 14: 217–225 北京大学学报(自然科学版) 第51 卷第4 期 2015 年7 月 646
[37] Daniels P L. Barriers to sustainable development in natural resource-based economies: Australia as a case study. Soc Nat Resources, 1992, 5: 247–262
[38] Darwin R, Tsigas M, Lewandrowski J, et al. Land use and cover in ecological economics. Ecol Econ, 1996, 17: 157–181
[39] 李雨潼. 基于3E 协调度分析的黑龙江省低碳经济发展路径研究. 求是学刊, 2013, 40(1): 73–79
[40] 潘文砚, 王宗军. 基于协调度模型的低碳竞争力评价指标体系研究. 情报杂志, 2012, 31(10): 76–82
[41] 王少鹏, 朱江玲, 岳超, 等. 碳排放与社会经济发展: 碳排放与社会发展Ⅱ. 北京大学学报: 自然科学版, 2010, 46(4): 505–509

“全碳排”核算与碳绩效评价方法研究

Calculation of Full Carbon Emission and Evaluation of Carbon Emission Performance

PDF

PDF (翻译版)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 6

编辑推荐

Metrics

留言

[1]	王巍淇,李天宏. 基于土地利用空间结构的云南省生态风险时空变化分析[J]. 北京大学学报（自然科学版）, 2014, 50(2): 355-360.
[2]	何羿,赵智杰. 环境影响评价在规避邻避效应中的作用与问题[J]. 北京大学学报（自然科学版）, 2013, 49(6): 1056-1064.
[3]	陶静娴,王仰麟,刘珍环. 城市居住空间生态质量评价??以深圳市为例[J]. 北京大学学报（自然科学版）, 2012, 48(2): 280-284.
[4]	都小尚, 刘永, 郭怀成, 刘慧, 阳平坚, 杨永辉. 区域规划累积环境影响评价方法框架研究[J]. 北京大学学报（自然科学版）, 2011, 47(3): 552-560.
[5]	曲常胜,毕军,黄蕾,李凤英,杨洁. 我国区域环境风险动态综合评价研究[J]. 北京大学学报（自然科学版）, 2010, 46(3): 477-482.
[6]	毛小苓,倪晋仁. 生态风险评价研究述评[J]. 北京大学学报（自然科学版）, 2005, 41(4): 646-654.