IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v69y2014icp92-105.html

Marginal abatement cost and carbon reduction potential outlook of key energy efficiency technologies in China׳s building sector to 2030

Author

Listed:
  • Xiao, He
  • Wei, Qingpeng
  • Wang, Hailin

Abstract

China achieved an energy savings of 67.5Mtce in the building sector at the end of the 11th Five-Year Plan and set a new target of 116Mtce by the end of the 12th Five-Year Plan. In this paper, an improved bottom-up model is developed to assess the carbon abatement potential and marginal abatement cost (MAC) of 34 selected energy-saving technologies/measures for China׳s building sector. The total reduction potential is 499.8 million t-CO2 by 2030. 4.8Gt-CO2 potential will be achieved cumulatively to 2030. By 2030, total primary energy consumption of Chinese building sector will rise continuously to 1343Mtce in the reference scenario and 1114Mtce in the carbon reduction scenario. Total carbon dioxide emission will rise to 2.39Gt-CO2 and 1.9Gt-CO2 in two scenarios separately. The average carbon abatement cost of the aforementioned technologies is 19.5$/t-CO2. The analysis reveals that strengthening successfully energy-saving technologies is important, especially for the residential building sector. The central government׳s direct investments in such technologies should be reduced without imposing significant negative effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiao, He & Wei, Qingpeng & Wang, Hailin, 2014. "Marginal abatement cost and carbon reduction potential outlook of key energy efficiency technologies in China׳s building sector to 2030," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 92-105.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:69:y:2014:i:c:p:92-105
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.02.021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421514001104
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.02.021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brown, Marilyn A., 2001. "Market failures and barriers as a basis for clean energy policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(14), pages 1197-1207, November.
    2. Jerry A. Hausman, 1979. "Individual Discount Rates and the Purchase and Utilization of Energy-Using Durables," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 33-54, Spring.
    3. Jaffe, Adam B. & Stavins, Robert N., 1994. "The energy paradox and the diffusion of conservation technology," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 91-122, May.
    4. Mortimer, N D & Ashley, A & Moody, C A C & Rix, J H R & Moss, S A, 1998. "Carbon dioxide savings in the commercial building sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(8), pages 615-624, July.
    5. repec:aen:journl:1987v08-01-a07 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. DeCanio, Stephen J., 1993. "Barriers within firms to energy-efficient investments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 906-914, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Häckel, Björn & Pfosser, Stefan & Tränkler, Timm, 2017. "Explaining the energy efficiency gap - Expected Utility Theory versus Cumulative Prospect Theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 414-426.
    2. Li, Jia & Just, Richard E., 2018. "Modeling household energy consumption and adoption of energy efficient technology," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 404-415.
    3. Qiu, Yueming & Colson, Gregory & Wetzstein, Michael E., 2017. "Risk preference and adverse selection for participation in time-of-use electricity pricing programs," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 126-142.
    4. Rockstuhl, Sebastian & Wenninger, Simon & Wiethe, Christian & Häckel, Björn, 2021. "Understanding the risk perception of energy efficiency investments: Investment perspective vs. energy bill perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Theofano Fotiou & Pantelis Capros & Panagiotis Fragkos, 2022. "Policy Modelling for Ambitious Energy Efficiency Investment in the EU Residential Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-29, March.
    6. Peterman, Andrew & Kourula, Arno & Levitt, Raymond, 2012. "A roadmap for navigating voluntary and mandated programs for building energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 415-426.
    7. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2025. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Economics of Environment, Climate Change, and Wine Selected Papers of Robert N Stavins Volume 3 (2011–2023), chapter 4, pages 53-118, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. von Knorring, Hannes, 2019. "Energy audits in shipping companies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 35-55.
    9. Anderson, Soren T. & Newell, Richard G., 2004. "Information programs for technology adoption: the case of energy-efficiency audits," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 27-50, March.
    10. Qiu, Yueming & Colson, Gregory & Grebitus, Carola, 2014. "Risk preferences and purchase of energy-efficient technologies in the residential sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 216-229.
    11. Arlan Brucal & Michael Roberts, 2015. "Can Energy Efficiency Standards Reduce Prices and Improve Quality? Evidence from the US Clothes Washer Market," Working Papers 2015-5, University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    12. AZOMAHOU, Théophile & BOUCEKKINE, Raouf & NGUYEN-VAN, Phu, 2009. "Promoting clean technologies under imperfect competition," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2009011, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    13. Sébastien Foudi, 2024. "Are risk attitude, impatience, and impulsivity related to the individual discount rate? Evidence from energy-efficient durable goods," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 96(4), pages 627-661, June.
    14. Sallee, James M. & West, Sarah E. & Fan, Wei, 2016. "Do consumers recognize the value of fuel economy? Evidence from used car prices and gasoline price fluctuations," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 61-73.
    15. Lin, Tyrone T. & Huang, Shio-Ling, 2011. "Application of the modified Tobin's q to an uncertain energy-saving project with the real options concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 408-420, January.
    16. Richard B. Howarth & Alan H. Sanstad, 1995. "Discount Rates And Energy Efficiency," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 13(3), pages 101-109, July.
    17. Charlier, Dorothée, 2015. "Energy efficiency investments in the context of split incentives among French households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 465-479.
    18. Obadiah I. Damak & Hasan Güngör, 2025. "The effects of rule of law, regulatory quality, and R&D on Japan's environmental sustainability," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(2), pages 2278-2291, April.
    19. Daziano, Ricardo A., 2015. "Inference on mode preferences, vehicle purchases, and the energy paradox using a Bayesian structural choice model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-26.
    20. Kesicki, Fabian, 2013. "What are the key drivers of MAC curves? A partial-equilibrium modelling approach for the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 142-151.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:69:y:2014:i:c:p:92-105. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.