Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 11, pp 11087–11099 | Cite as

Optimal path for controlling pollution emissions in the Chinese electric power industry considering technological heterogeneity

  • Xianyu Yu
  • Lei Jin
  • Qunwei WangEmail author
  • Dequn Zhou
Research Article
  • 89 Downloads

Abstract

The electric power industry is not only an important part in the Chinese economic system but also the key industry with the highest emissions of air pollutants in China. This paper aims to control the pollution emissions of the Chinese electric power industry and enhance its electric-generation capacity though pollution-emission allocation patterns and inefficiency elimination. The data envelopment analysis centralized allocation model (DEA-CA) under metafrontier framework is adopted to distribute pollution emissions and electric-generation capacity considering technological heterogeneity at regional and national levels. The empirical result shows that the emission reduction responsibility is directly proportional to regional power generation performance. The metafrontier framework allocates emission permits to combine the national and regional, which makes the adjustment of each province more reasonable. At last, the relationship between the aggregate optimal electricity capacity and the pollution emission control coefficient is shown to follow an inverted U-shape curve, which implies that a modest emission control policy might be more appropriate for the electric power industry to achieve the joint optimizing goal of electricity generation enhancement and pollution emission control.

Keywords

Pollutant emissions Efficiency Data envelopment analysis Metafrontier 

Notes

Funding information

This work is supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (71501098, 71603135, 71774080, 71573186, 71813003), China Postdoctoral Science Foundation Funded Project (2016M590453, 2018T110501), Science Foundation of Ministry of Education of China (17YJC630205), and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (3082018NR2018011, NE2017005, NW2018002,).

References

  1. An Q, Wen Y, Xiong B, Yang M, Chen X (2017) Allocation of carbon dioxide emission permits with the minimum cost for Chinese provinces in big data environment. J Clean Prod 142:886–893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barros CP, Managi S, Matousek R (2012) The technical efficiency of the Japanese banks: non-radial directional performance measurement with undesirable output. Omega 40(1):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barros CP, Wanke P, Dumbo S, Manso JP (2017) Efficiency in angolan hydro-electric power station: a two-stage virtual frontier dynamic DEA and simplex regression approach. Renew Sust Energ Rev 78:588–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beasley JE (2003) Allocating fixed costs and resources via data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 147(1):198–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bi GB, Song W, Zhou P, Liang L (2014) Does environmental regulation affect energy efficiency in China's thermal power generation? Empirical evidence from a slacks-based DEA model. Energy Policy 66:537–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Charnes A, Cooper WW (1962) Programming with linear fractional functionals. Nav Res Logist 9(3–4):181–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen W, Zhou K, Yang S (2017) Evaluation of China’s electric energy efficiency under environmental constraints: a DEA cross efficiency model based on game relationship. J Clean Prod 164:38–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chiu YH, Lin JC, Hsu CC, Lee JW (2013) Carbon emission allowances of efficiency analysis: application of super SBM ZSG-DEA model. Pol J Environ Stud 22(3):653–666Google Scholar
  9. Cook WD, Du J, Zhu J (2017) Units invariant DEA when weight restrictions are present: ecological performance of US electricity industry. Ann Oper Res 255(1–2):323–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diakoulaki D, Mavrotas G, Papayannakis L (1995) Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: the CRITIC method. Comput Oper Res 22(7):763–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Du J, Cook WD, Liang L, Zhu J (2014) Fixed cost and resource allocation based on DEA cross-efficiency. Eur J Oper Res 235(1):206–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fan Y, Wu J, Xia Y, Liu JY (2016) How will a nationwide carbon market affect regional economies and efficiency of CO2 emission reduction in China? China Econ Rev 38:151–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Noh DW, Weber W (2005) Characteristics of a polluting technology: theory and practice. J Econ 126(2):469–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fei R, Lin B (2016) Energy efficiency and production technology heterogeneity in China's agricultural sector: a meta-frontier approach. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 109:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gomes EG, Lins ME (2008) Modelling undesirable outputs with zero sum gains data envelopment analysis models. J Oper Res Soc 59(5):616–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hu Z, Chen Y, Yao L, Wei C, Li C (2016) Optimal allocation of regional water resources: from a perspective of equity–efficiency tradeoff. Resour Conserv Recycl 109:102–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huang L, Hu J, Chen M, Zhang H (2017) Impacts of power generation on air quality in China—part I: an overview. Resour Conserv Recycl 121:103–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim K, Kim Y (2012) International comparison of industrial CO2 emission trends and the energy efficiency paradox utilizing production-based decomposition. Energy Econ 34(5):1724–1741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kuosmanen T (2005) Weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis with undesirable outputs. Am J Agric Econ 87(4):1077–1082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lin H, Wei Q, Liu D (2017) Online identifier–actor–critic algorithm for optimal control of nonlinear systems. Optimal Control Appl Methods 38(3):317–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lozano S, Villa G (2004) Centralized resource allocation using data envelopment analysis. J Prod Anal 22(1–2):143–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Managi S, Jena PR (2008) Environmental productivity and Kuznets curve in India. Ecol Econ 65(2):432–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mekaroonreung M, Johnson AL (2012) Estimating the shadow prices of SO2 and NOx for US coal power plants: a convex nonparametric least squares approach. Energy Econ 34(3):723–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Miao Z, Geng Y, Sheng J (2016) Efficient allocation of CO2 emissions in China: a zero sum gains data envelopment model. J Clean Prod 112:4144–4150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nakamura Y, Mori T, Sato MA, Ishii S (2007) Reinforcement learning for a biped robot based on a CPG-actor-critic method. Neural Netw 20(6):723–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. NDRC (2017) National Development and Reform Commission. http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbtz/201704/t20170410_843769.html. Accessed 14 June 2018
  27. O’Donnell CJ, Rao DP, Battese GE (2008) Metafrontier frameworks for the study of firm-level efficiencies and technology ratios. Empir Econ 34(2):231–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Oh DH (2010) A metafrontier approach for measuring an environmentally sensitive productivity growth index. Energy Econ 32(1):146–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pang RZ, Deng ZQ, Chiu YH (2015) Pareto improvement through a reallocation of carbon emission quotas. Renew Sust Energ Rev 50:419–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sueyoshi T, Goto M (2001) Slack-adjusted DEA for time series analysis: performance measurement of Japanese electric power generation industry in 1984–1993. Eur J Oper Res 133(2):232–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sueyoshi T, Goto M (2012) Weak and strong disposability vs. natural and managerial disposability in DEA environmental assessment: comparison between Japanese electric power industry and manufacturing industries. Energy Econ 34(3):686–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sueyoshi T, Yuan Y, Goto M (2017) A literature study for DEA applied to energy and environment. Energy Econ 62:104–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang D, Zhao J (2016) Design optimization of mechanical properties of ceramic tool material during turning of ultra-high-strength steel 300M with AHP and CRITIC method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 84(9–12):2381–2390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wang K, Zhang X, Wei YM, Yu S (2013) Regional allocation of CO2 emissions allowance over provinces in China by 2020. Energy Policy 54:214–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wang Q, Su B, Zhou P, Chiu CR (2016) Measuring total-factor CO2 emission performance and technology gaps using a non-radial directional distance function: a modified approach. Energy Econ 56:475–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wu J, Zhu Q, Liang L (2016) CO2 emissions and energy intensity reduction allocation over provincial industrial sectors in China. Appl Energy 166:282–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Xie BC, Fan Y, Qu QQ (2012) Does generation form influence 684 environmental efficiency performance? An analysis of China’s power system. Appl Energy 96:261–271Google Scholar
  38. Yang M, Li Y, Chen Y, Liang L (2014) An equilibrium efficiency frontier data envelopment analysis approach for evaluating decision-making units with fixed-sum outputs. Eur J Oper Res 239(2):479–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yang M, Li YJ, Liang L (2015) A generalized equilibrium efficient frontier data envelopment analysis approach for evaluating DMUs with fixed-sum outputs. Eur J Oper Res 246(1):209–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yao X, Zhou H, Zhang A, Li A (2015) Regional energy efficiency, carbon emission performance and technology gaps in China: a meta-frontier non-radial directional distance function analysis. Energy Policy 84:142–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zhang N, Choi Y (2013) A comparative study of dynamic changes in CO2 emission performance of fossil fuel power plants in China and Korea. Energy Policy 62:324–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang H, Cao L, Zhang B (2017) Emissions trading and technology adoption: an adaptive agent-based analysis of thermal power plants in China. Resour Conserv Recycl 121:23–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhou P, Wang M (2016) Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: a review. Ecol Econ 125:47–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zhou P, Ang BW, Poh KL (2008) Measuring environmental performance under different environmental DEA technologies. Energy Econ 30(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhou P, Ang BW, Han JY (2010) Total factor carbon emission performance: a Malmquist index analysis. Energy Econ 32(1):194–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhou P, Ang BW, Wang H (2012) Energy and CO2 emission performance in electricity generation: a non-radial directional distance function approach. Eur J Oper Res 221(3):625–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhou P, Sun ZR, Zhou DQ (2014a) Optimal path for controlling CO2 emissions in China: a perspective of efficiency analysis. Energy Econ 45:99–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhou P, Zhou X, Fan LW (2014b) On estimating shadow prices of undesirable outputs with efficiency models: a literature review. Appl Energy 130:799–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Economics and ManagementNanjing University of Aeronautics and AstronauticsNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations