MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6959316266 · doi:10.1109/tem.2025.3589549

Impacts of Carbon Tax Policies on Low-Carbon Technology Investment in the Electricity Supply Chain Under Peak–Valley Pricing

2025· article· en· W6959316266 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanisms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersBasic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNational Social Science Fund of ChinaChina Postdoctoral Science Foundation
KeywordsProfitability indexElectricityCarbon taxInvestment (military)Electricity retailingMains electricityElectricity marketUnit (ring theory)Electricity generation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates low-carbon technology (LCT) investment strategies within the electricity supply chain, employing a hybrid decision-making framework that considers both decentralized and cooperative approaches. By integrating a peak–valley pricing mechanism, the article examines the impact of carbon tax policies (CTPs) on LCT investment. It analyzes the competitive and cooperative interactions between power generation and electricity retail (ER) enterprises, focusing on how the CTP influences investment decisions, electricity pricing, and the profitability of the electricity enterprise under a wholesale electricity pricing discount strategy. The findings are as follows: 1) Surprisingly, CTPs may not always incentivize LCT investment under peak–valley pricing. When unit carbon emissions are low, CTPs promote greater LCT investment, stimulate electricity demand during peak and valley periods, and enhance the profitability of the ER enterprise. However, when unit carbon emissions are high, the absence of CTPs more effectively drives LCT investment, increases electricity demand, and yields higher profits for the ER enterprise. 2) Under a wholesale electricity pricing discount strategy, compared to the case without CTPs, when unit carbon emissions are low, CTPs lead to lower initial wholesale electricity prices during peak and valley periods, thereby increasing marginal profits for the ER enterprise. Conversely, when unit carbon emissions are high, CTPs lead to higher initial wholesale electricity prices in both periods, reducing the ER enterprise’s marginal profits. 3) Under a CTP, higher unit carbon emissions increase retail electricity prices during peak and valley periods, which reduces electricity demand, LCT investment, and the profitability of electricity enterprises. Furthermore, an increase in the unit cost of electricity generation raises retail electricity prices during peak and valley periods, further exacerbating declines in demand, investment, and profits.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.186
Teacher spread0.179 · 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