The Provincial Carbon Footprint and Trade

Abstract:

Based on the data of provincial input-output model and the carbon footprint model, the analysis is focused on provincial carbon footprint and the space transfer of carbon emissions. The results have shown that: (1) There are significant differences of provincial total carbon footprint amounts: resource-rich provinces have high total carbon footprint amounts, followed by processing and manufacturing provinces and municipalities; Regions with high energy efficiency have low carbon footprint amounts, so does southwestern region where economic and industrial development level is relatively low. (2) The provincial differences of carbon footprint per capita are related to demand structure: the amounts of carbon footprint are high in provinces with higher demand of consumption and investment, especially those provinces with strong demand for construction and processing industries. The amounts of carbon footprint are low in provinces which are non-resource-based, have limited investment and construction, and its economic structure is not dominated by processing and manufacturing. (3) Interprovincial trades have a significant impact on carbon footprint and carbon emissions. Provinces with well developed infrastructure have net CO₂ emissions flow-in that are directly induced by high energy consumption products; southwestern region, where processing and manufacturing industry is relatively less-developed, has main CO₂ emission flow-in, which are induced by the demand of processing and manufacturing industries; resource-intensive provinces and provinces with well-developed processing and manufacturing industries have net CO₂ emission flow-out, which are induced by interprovincial trades.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 524-527)
• Pages: 3514-3518
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.524-527.3514
• Online since: May 2012
• Authors: Yan Wang, Na Li
• Keywords: Carbon Footprint, Input-Output, Trade

References

[1] Carbon Trust. Carbon Footprint Measurement Methodology. version 1.3,(2007).

[2] Grubb, Ellis. Meeting the carbon challenge: the role of commercial real estate owners, users& managers. Chicago, (2007).

[3] Wang Wei, Lin Jianyi, Cui Shenghui. An Overview of Carbon Footprint Analysis. Environmental Science & Technology. 33,7.(2010), p.71-p.78. (In Chinese)

[4] Wiedmann T. A first empirical comparison of energy Footprints embodied in trade – MRIO versus PLUM, Ecological Economics, Vol.68(2009) ,P1975-P1990.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.023

[5] Zhao Rongqin, Huang Xianjin, Zhong Taiyang. Research on carbon emission intensity and carbon footprint of different industrial spaces in China. Acta Geographica Sinica,65,9.(2010),p.1048-p.1057. (In Chinese)

[6] Piecyk M I, McKinnon A C. Forecasting the carbon footprint of road freight transport in 2020, Int. J. Production Economics.128(2010),p.31-p.42.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.08.027

[7] Kenny T, Gray N F. Comparative performance of six carbon footprint models foe use in Ireland. Environmental Impact Assessment Review.16(2009),p.1-p.6.

DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2008.06.001

[8] Druckman  A, Jackson T. The carbon footprint of UK households 1990-2004: a socio-economically disaggregated, quasi-multi-regional input-output model. Ecological Economics.1,19.(2009)

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.01.013

[9] Padgett J P, Steinemann A C, Clarke J H et al. A comparison of carbon calculators. Environmental Impact Assessment Review.28,(2008).p.106-p.115.

DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2007.08.001