MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280568347 · doi:10.3390/en15103601

Inter-Provincial Electricity Trading and Its Effects on Carbon Emissions from the Power Industry

2022· article· en· W4280568347 on OpenAlexaff
Yanfeng Li, Yongping Li, Guohe Huang, Rubing Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersChinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsElectricityDivisia indexGreenhouse gasElectricity generationNatural resource economicsRenewable energyAgricultural economicsHydropowerEnvironmental scienceElectricity marketElectric power industryCarbon offsetEconomicsEnergy intensityBusinessEfficient energy usePower (physics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electricity trading is an effective measure to minimize carbon emissions and alleviate the imbalance between reverse distribution of regional energy resources and power load. However, the effects of China’s electricity trading on carbon emissions have not been fully explored due to lack of complete and balanced inter-provincial power transmission data. Therefore, the electricity generation–consumption downscaling model, logarithmic mean Divisia index (LMDI) model, and random forest clustering algorithm within a general framework were used in the present study to explore the effect of electricity trading on level of carbon emissions. Comprehensive inter-provincial electricity transmission data were generated, driving factors including electricity imports and exports were decomposed at the national and provincial scales, and clustered provincial policy implications were evaluated. The results revealed that: (i) although economic activities were the main driving factor for increase in carbon emissions at the national level, 382.95 million tons carbon emissions were offset from 2005 to 2019 due to inter-provincial electricity importation, whereas electricity export increased carbon emission by 230.30 million tons; (ii) analysis at the provincial level showed that electricity exports from Sichuan and Yunnan provinces accounted for more than 20% of the nation’s total electricity flow. Notably, this high level of exports did not significantly increase carbon emissions in these provinces owing to the abundant hydropower resources; (iii) emission reductions were only observed at the national level if the carbon intensity of the exporting provinces was lower compared with that of importing provinces, or if the electricity trading was generated from renewable sources; (iv) the effect of electricity import on emissions reduction was markedly higher relative to the effect of electricity export in most provinces, which reflected the actual situation of sustaining optimization of electricity generation structure in provincial grids of China. These findings provide a basis for decision makers to understand the contributions of electricity trading to the changes in carbon emissions from electricity generation, as well as form a foundation to explore practicable carbon emission mitigation strategies in the power industry.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207