China's industrial energy consumption trends and impacts of the Top-1000 Enterprises Energy-Saving Program and the Ten Key Energy-Saving Projects
This study analyzes China's industrial energy consumption trends from 1996 to 2010 with a focus on the impact of the Top-1000 Enterprises Energy-Saving Program and the Ten Key Energy-Saving Projects. From 1996 to 2010, China's industrial energy consumption increased by 134%, even as the industrial economic energy intensity decreased by 46%. Decomposition analysis shows that the production effect was the dominant cause of the rapid growth in industrial energy consumption, while the efficiency effect was the major factor slowing the growth of industrial energy consumption. The structural effect had a relatively small and fluctuating influence. Analysis shows the strong association of industrial energy consumption with the growth of China's economy and changing energy policies. An assessment of the Top-1000 Enterprises Energy-Saving Program and the Ten Key Energy-Saving Projects indicates that the economic energy intensity of major energy-intensive industrial sub-sectors, as well as the physical energy intensity of major energy-intensive industrial products, decreased significantly during China's 11th Five Year Plan (FYP) period (2006–2010). This study also shows the importance and challenge of realizing structural change toward less energy-intensive activities in China during the 12th FYP period (2011–2015).
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Price, Lynn & Wang, Xuejun & Yun, Jiang, 2010. "The challenge of reducing energy consumption of the Top-1000 largest industrial enterprises in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 6485-6498, November.
- Ang, B. W., 2005. "The LMDI approach to decomposition analysis: a practical guide," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 867-871, May.
- Price, Lynn & Levine, Mark D. & Zhou, Nan & Fridley, David & Aden, Nathaniel & Lu, Hongyou & McNeil, Michael & Zheng, Nina & Qin, Yining & Yowargana, Ping, 2011. "Assessment of China's energy-saving and emission-reduction accomplishments and opportunities during the 11th Five Year Plan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 2165-2178, April.
- Zhang, ZhongXiang, 2003.
"Why did the energy intensity fall in China's industrial sector in the 1990s? The relative importance of structural change and intensity change,"
Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 625-638, November.
- Zhang, ZhongXiang, 2001. "Why did the energy intensity fall in China's industrial sector in the 1990s? the relative importance of structural change and intensity change," MPRA Paper 13149, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Ang, B.W. & Liu, Na, 2007. "Negative-value problems of the logarithmic mean Divisia index decomposition approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 739-742, January.
- Rawski, Thomas G., 2001. "What is happening to China's GDP statistics?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 347-354.
- Ang, B.W. & Liu, Na, 2007. "Handling zero values in the logarithmic mean Divisia index decomposition approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 238-246, January.
- Sinton, Jonathan E. & Levine, Mark D., 1994. "Changing energy intensity in Chinese industry : The relatively importance of structural shift and intensity change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 239-255, March.
- Zhao, Xiaoli & Ma, Chunbo & Hong, Dongyue, 2010. "Why did China's energy intensity increase during 1998-2006: Decomposition and policy analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1379-1388, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:50:y:2012:i:c:p:562-569. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.