Next Article in Journal
Sustainability and EMAS: Impact of Motivations and Barriers on the Perceived Benefits from the Adoption of Standards
Previous Article in Journal
Sustainability Investigation of Resource-Based Cities in Northeastern China
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis of Carbon Emissions from Industry: A Case Study from China

School of Economic & Management, China University of Petroleum (Huadong), No. 66 West Changjiang Road, Qingdao 266580, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2016, 8(10), 1059; https://doi.org/10.3390/su8101059
Submission received: 13 August 2016 / Revised: 26 September 2016 / Accepted: 11 October 2016 / Published: 20 October 2016
(This article belongs to the Section Energy Sustainability)

Abstract

:
China has overtaken the United States as the world’s largest producer of carbon dioxide, with industrial carbon emissions (ICE) accounting for approximately 65% of the country’s total emissions. Understanding the ICE decoupling patterns and factors influencing the decoupling status is a prerequisite for balancing economic growth and carbon emissions. This paper provides an overview of ICE based on decoupling elasticity and the Tapio decoupling model. Furthermore, the study identifies the factors contributing to ICE changes in China, using the Kaya identity and Log Mean Divisia Index (LMDI) techniques. Based on the effects and contributions of ICE, we close with a number of recommendations. The results revealed a significant upward trend of ICE during the study period 1994 to 2013, with a total amount of 11,147 million tons. Analyzing the decoupling relationship indicates that “weak decoupling” and “expansive decoupling” were the main states during the study period. The decomposition analysis showed that per capita wealth associated with industrial outputs and energy intensity are the main driving force of ICE, while energy intensity of industrial output and energy structure are major determinants for ICE reduction. The largest contributing cumulative effect to ICE is per capita wealth, at 1.23 in 2013. This factor is followed by energy intensity, with a contributing cumulative effect of −0.32. The cumulative effects of energy structure and population are relatively small, at 0.01 and 0.08, respectively.

1. Introduction

A continuous growth in energy consumption has increased atmospheric carbon greenhouse gas emissions [1,2]. As a result, carbon currently contributes approximately 63% of the gaseous radiative force contributing to climate change. Atmospheric carbon had increased to 390.5 ppm by 2011, according to the IPCC reports [3,4,5], thus exceeding pre-industrial levels by approximately 40% [6]. China has surpassed the United States as the world’s biggest carbon emitter. Industrial carbon emissions (ICE) accounted for approximately 65% of total emissions [7,8,9]. The increased ICE from China has received significant attention in light of global warming, and there is a global consensus about the importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing ICE has become increasingly important for the Chinese policymakers, partly because China committed itself to lower the carbon intensity of GDP by 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2020. Based on the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference in 2009 [10,11,12,13,14], China has realized the importance of reducing carbon emissions [15,16,17,18]. China also should pay significant attention to make emission reductions compatible with economic growth, especially for industry.
Past studies used decomposition methodologies to quantitatively identify factors on changes carbon emission, at country-, regional-, and global-level. These factors can in turn be applied in energy policymaking. For example, Shahbaz [19] and Leitão [20,21] discovered a relationship between the economy and carbon emissions from the perspective of globalization. Sun [22], Ma [23], Liao [24], Q. Wang [25], Paul [26], M. Shahbaz [27,28,29,30], and Lise [31] used a decomposition method to quantify the influencing factors of carbon emissions in China, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Portugal, Turkey, and Brazil, respectively. Magazzino [18,32,33,34,35] used a time series approach to examine the relationship between GDP, energy consumption and carbon emissions, and energy use in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, EMU countries, Israel, and ASEAN-6 countries.
Wang and Yang [36] used the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei area as example to divide the literature about the relationship between ICE and economic growth into three assessment categories: energy efficiency, environment, and economic development. Using the DEA model, some studies measured environmental and energy performance in China [37,38,39,40] and conducted a comparative analysis of China’s regional energy and emission performance [41]. Chung et al. [42] used the LMDI technique to evaluate the respective contributions of changes in residential energy use in Hong Kong. Leitão [43] used panel-data analysis to analyze energy consumption and foreign direct investment of Portugal. In general, researchers studying China have found that the decline in energy intensity has been the main factor associated with emissions deceleration [23,44,45,46]. Fan [47] uncovered that the change in primary energy-related carbon intensity and the material sectors’ final energy-related carbon intensity mainly contributed to the decline in energy intensity.
In addition, other studies have compared energy-related carbon emissions between sectors, mostly concentrating on the rural energy and transport sectors. Wang [48] studied carbon emission from China’s transport sector. Scholl [49] examined the five influencing factors on carbon emissions from passenger transport in nine OECD countries. Chipper [50] qualified the three key influencing factors on changes in energy use and carbon emissions from freight transport in 10 industrialized countries. Lakshmanan and Ha [51] reported that increased personal travel, population, and GDP contributed to changes in carbon emission from transport sector in the U.S. from 1970 to 1991
As mentioned above, previous studies usually focused two issues: (1) investigated the decoupling index of ICE and economic activities; and (2) assessed the status of decoupling. Few studies have researched the inner mechanisms of the changes of each factor. Furthermore, no research has been done on the decoupling and decomposition analysis of China’s ICE using the most recent data. As the country with the most carbon emissions, China allows an effective case study for a decoupling, combine with decomposition technique. This paper is aimed to clarify the relationship between carbon emission and economic output in China’s industrial sector, and then to examine these influencing factors of decoupling status. To achieve this, we developed a Tapio model based on extended Kaya identity to analysis decoupling status, and developed decoupling index based on LMDI techniques to study the contribution of different factors influencing industrial carbon emission in China from 1994–2013.

2. Data and Methodology

2.1. Data Sources

Data for the period of 1994 to 2013 were collected from issues of the China Statistical Yearbook [52,53,54,55]. The latest data are updated in the CSY-2015; industry has increased rapidly since 1994 and policy leaders have begun to pay greater attention to both energy efficiency and environmental pressure caused by ICE. China has begun to vigorously develop clean energies, such as wind power, photovoltaic, nuclear power, and shale gas [56,57,58,59,60,61] to reduce emissions. Despite this, however, 98% of industrial energy is coal consumption, which has constantly generated carbon emissions.
The National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China publishes the CSY yearly. It is the only official agency to publish statistical data; the data are comprehensive and highly reliability. In preparation for the decomposition analysis, data were specifically collected about energy consumption by industrial sector, which mainly includes coal consumption, coke consumption, crude oil consumption, gasoline consumption, kerosene consumption, diesel oil consumption, fuel oil consumption, and natural gas consumption. Industrial output and population data were also collected.

2.2. Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index (LMDI)

There are dozens of decomposition methods that enable analysts to identify the determinants of emissions changes over intervals of time. In general, studies have found that the LMDI is the most appropriate method to decompose energy consumption and emission changes [62,63,64,65]. Recently, the Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index (LMDI) approach to energy decomposition has emerged as a preferred decoupling model [66]. LMDI is a calculation process proven to be a complete decomposition method, without zero-value problems [67]. In this study, the decomposition technique was combined with a decoupling analysis to analyze the relationship between industrial growth and ICE. This allowed for the identification of factors that contribute to changes in China. The LMDI can be expressed as an extended Kaya identity, which was first proposed by Yoichi Kaya [68]. The extended Kaya identity is as follows:
C t = i t C = i C i t E i t × E i t E t × E t I O V t × I O V t P t × P t = i t r i t × n i t × e t × a t × P t .
In this expression, C t represents the carbon emissions in the t year, the subscript i represents energy type; the superscript t represents year. The C i t is the carbon emissions of the ith energy in the t year; E i t is the consumption of the ith energy in the t year; E t stands for total energy consumption in the t year; I O V t denotes the industrial output values. Because the study’s target period was 1994 to 2013, a more recent price index was considered more appropriate. As such, we used industrial output data adjusted to 1994 prices. Total energy consumption data were then converted into standard coal consumption. Pt represents the population in the t year. The r i t = C i t E i t denotes the carbon coefficient of ith energy, the n i t = E i t E t illustrates the energy structure. The e t = E t I O V t represents energy intensity, and the a t = I O V t P t is the per capita wealth, reflecting the industrial scale.
According to the LMDI method, the change of carbon consumption between a base year 0 and a target year t, denoted by Δ C , is 0, because the carbon emission coefficients are basically unchanged and there is no systematic monitoring of ICE in China. Thus, Δ C can be decomposed into the following determinant factors:
Δ C = Δ C n + Δ C e + Δ C a + Δ C p
where Δ C refers to the total changes in carbon emissions, which can be further decomposed into the following indictors: Δ C n (the effect of energy structure), Δ C e (the effect of energy intensity), Δ C a (the effect of per capita wealth), Δ C p (the population effect). If we measure the effects of determinant factors each year, we can generate figures for eight energy types. We can use the following formulae:
Δ C n = i = 1 8 L ( C i t 1 , C i t ) l n [ n i ( t ) n i ( t 1 ) ]
Δ C e = i = 1 8 L ( C i t 1 , C i t ) l n [ e i ( t ) e i ( t 1 ) ]
Δ C a = i = 1 8 L ( C i t 1 , C i t ) l n [ a i ( t ) a i ( t 1 ) ]
Δ C p = i = 1 8 L ( C i t 1 , C i t ) l n [ p i ( t ) p i ( t 1 ) ]
L ( C i t 1 , C i t ) = { C i t C i t 1 l n ( C i t C i t 1 ) , C i t C i t 1 C i t or C i t 1 , C i t = C i t 1
To measure the effect of each factor’s contribution [11], we define them as follows:
G n = Δ C n Δ C
G e = Δ C e Δ C
G a = Δ C a Δ C
G p = Δ C p Δ C
where G n , G e ,   G a and G p indicate the effect of the contribution of energy structure, energy intensity, per capita wealth effect, and population, respectively.

2.3. Decoupling Elasticity Model

The decoupling model proposed by the Tapio model has been developed based on the OECD decoupling model, which has been widely used to analyze the relationship between economic growth and ICE [69,70,71,72]. The Tapio decoupling model does not require a base year, which is more efficient and appropriate than the OECD model [73], as it mitigates the problem of choosing a base period. To probe the decoupling status in a convenient and intuitive way, a novel decoupling index is needed. In this article, based on the additive decomposition results of energy-related CO2 emission changes, the decoupling factor ε can be measured via the ratio defined by Tapio [74] as follows:
ε = % C % GDP = Δ C C Δ GDP GDP = ( Δ C n + Δ C e + Δ C a + Δ C p ) C Δ GDP GDP
In this expression, ε is the decoupling factor, % C is the percent change in carbon emissions, and % GDP is the percent change of GDP. Carbon is the ICE for the current year, Δ carbon is the variation of ICE at the current time compared with the base period, GDP is the gross domestic product of the current year, and Δ GDP is the variation of gross domestic product at the current time compared with the base period. The results yielded eight logical possibilities, shown in Figure 1 [74]. These possibilities include weak decoupling, expansive decoupling, expansive negative decoupling, strong negative decoupling, weak negative decoupling, recessive coupling, recessive decoupling, and strong decoupling. These results are often named the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis [75,76].
According to the IPCC method of greenhouse gas emission inventories [68], carbon emissions can be estimated via the following formula:
C = i E i × r i i E i × S C i × Q i × K i .
In this formula, C represents carbon emissions, E i is the ith energy consumption, and r i (kgCO2/kg or kgCO2/m3) indicates the total energy consumption and the total CO2 emission coefficient of ith energy. S C i (tC/TJ) and O i refer to the default value of carbon content and carbon oxidation rate; K i (kJ/kg or kJ/m3) indicates the average lower heating value (molecular weight of CO2 divided by the molecular weight of carbon). Table 1 shows the default value of carbon content, carbon oxidation rate, average lower heating value, and carbon coefficient for different kinds of energy, based on the GHG Protocol Tool for Energy Consumption in China [77].

3. Cointegration Test

Prior to the decoupling analysis, we conducted a comprehensive analysis of the stationary data and analyzed the long-run equilibrium relationship between total carbon dioxide emissions and the effect of each factor. This involved a cointegration test [78,79], where every independent variable was assessed in a one-to-one correspondence relationship with each of the effects listed above in the LMDI decomposition. CO2 emissions was used as the dependent variable. We also conducted an Augmented Dickey–Fuller (ADF) Unite root test to assure the stationary property, subsequent to the Johansen System Cointegration Test.

3.1. Augmented Dickey–Fuller Unite Root Test

We applied the ADF Unite root test to conduct a stationary analysis of all variable quantities before the cointegration analysis. The variables (C, e, a, and p) were nondimensionalized before proceeding with ADF testing. Because there are eight kinds of energy, there are eight variables n i   ( i = 1 ,     8 ) ; these are percentages and not nondimensionalized. Following the calculation, we analyzed the ADF test by comparing the calculated result and the hypothetical ADF value. If the critical value exceeded the ADF test value, then the result was considered stationary; if not, the testing result was considered nonstationary. Table 2 shows the ADF testing results; all the variables are stationary after logarithmic function and first and second differencing, suggesting that all the variables are integrated.

3.2. Johansen System Cointegration Test

Based on unit root tests, the integrated data for the variables can be further tested for cointegration (Table 3). Table 3 shows the three cointegration relationships among the variables at the 1% level. In summary, the calculated results demonstrate that at least three cointegrating relationships exist between carbon dioxide emissions and energy intensity, per capita wealth, and population.

3.3. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis

Descriptive statistics are used to describe the basic features of the data in a study. Descriptive statistics usually include the measures of central tendency statistics, distributions of discrete variables statistics, and the degree of dispersion statistics. We use a data file containing data of 12 variables including C (total carbon emissions), P (the population), a (per capita wealth), e (energy intensity), and n i (the percentage of consumption of the ith energy on the total energy consumption; there are eight kinds of energy, i = 1, 2, 3, …, 8) to conduct the descriptive statistics using SPSS version 2.0. The data are all metric data and time series data. The results of the descriptive statistics are presented below (Table 4). In the results of descriptive statistics, we use the index mean to measure the central tendency of variables, use the indexes Kurtosis and Skewness of variables to reflect the distributions of discrete variables, and use the indexes Standard deviation, Variance, Minimum, and Maximum to reflect the degree of dispersion.
Correlation analysis is useful for determining the direction and strength of a relationship between two variables. In the study, we also use a data file containing data on 12 variables including C, P (the population), a, e, and n i (i = 1, 2, 3, …, 8) to conduct the descriptive statistics using SPSS version 2.0. The results of the correlation analysis are presented below (Table 5). The results of correlation analysis between different variables are shown in Table 5.

4. Analysis Results and Discussion

4.1. An Overview of Industrial Carbon Emissions

According to Equation (2), we first calculated carbon emissions from different energy types; we then calculated the industrial carbon emissions every year, shown in Table 6.
In addition, we used the carbon emission coefficients of different energy types based on the GHG Protocol Tool for Energy Consumption in China [77]. Figure 2 shows that the carbon emissions intensity could be analyzed in three stages: 1994–1997, 1998–1999, and 2000–2013. The ICE from industrial sectors experienced a significant upward trend during this period, reaching a total amount of 11,147 million tons in 2013. The ICE continuously increased, with the exception of 1998 and 1999. From 1994 to 1997, the ICE continued to steadily grow, with a rapid increase after 2000. The average annual growth rates of 1994–1997, 1998–1999, and 2000–2013 were 4.76%, −2.25%, and 9.23%, respectively. Due to the rapid economic growth, the ICE increased to 11,147 million tons by 2013, almost 3.7 times the 3003.19 million tons in 1994. In 1998–1999, the ICE decreased, falling across both years. This decline was mainly due to the Asian financial crisis in 1997, which affected China’s economy. The slow industrial growth rate led to stable, low ICE in China.

4.2. Decoupling Analysis

To explore the relationship between carbon emissions and economic growth, we used Equation (1) to calculate the decoupling elasticity using the IOV (Industrial Output Values) to replace economic growth. Table 1 shows the results; Figure 3 shows trends during the study period, comparing the environmental pressures posed by the industrial output values from 1995 to 2013. The specific values and status judgments related to decoupling elasticity are based on Figure 2 and the calculation process is shown in Table 1. Table 3 shows that the decoupling elasticity of the overall industrial sector can be divided into four states: weak decoupling, strong decoupling, expansive decoupling, and expansive negative decoupling. These coincide with Figure 3; for example, the values from 2003, 2004, and 2013 are higher in Figure 3. This indicates that the speed of ICE growth exceeded the speed of industrial output growth.
As Figure 3 and Table 6 show, the decoupling elasticity increased from 0.65 to 2.24, indicating that huge environmental pressure accompanied industrial growth. The trends associated with decoupling elasticity are different. The years 2003–2004 and 2013 were the most notable, as these years demonstrate a state of expansive negative decoupling. The decoupling elasticity values fluctuated between −0.05 and 1.6 except for 2013; the values reached their lowest points at −0.45999 and −0.0471 between 1998 and 1999. These reflect the best conditions and exert the least pressure on the environment with a minimal elasticity value, while maintaining an upward trend after 1999. Based on the decoupling analysis, the overall effect on industrial decoupling was still weak. Further, the decoupling relationship indicates that “weak decoupling” and “expansive decoupling” were the main states during the study period.

4.3. Decomposition Analysis

As discussed above, the decoupling analysis reflects the levels of environmental burden caused by the industrial sector. We use the decomposition technology proposed by the evaluation criterion to assesses industrial progress and identify the driving forces behind the increasing ICE [80,81]. Using LMDI, the ICE were decomposed into four effects (energy structure, energy intensity, per capita wealth effect, and population) to investigate the decoupling path of industry in China. The effects and cumulative effects indicate each factor’s weight and the degree to which emission reduction efforts outweigh and define the contribution of industrial output. Table 6 and Table 7 and Figure 4 present the results of the analysis. Table 2 shows the effects of different factors of ICE year by year from 1995 to 2013. In addition, we calculated the cumulative effects of different factors of ICE and the contributions of different factors, selecting 1984 as the base year. These are shown in Table 7 and Figure 4.
A positive value indicates a positive influence on ICE increases; a negative value indicates a negative influence on ICE increases. As shown in Table 6 and Table 7, different factors had different effects. Among the four factors, per capita wealth and energy intensity are the major factors influencing carbon emissions. Per capita wealth and population move in a consistent direction, and are always positive driving forces. Energy structure and energy intensity are mostly negative forces. Energy structure and population play a relatively unimportant role. To improve the accuracy of the results, we combined multiplicative decomposition with the calculation of effect contributions. The effects of different factors on ICE varied in China year by year are shown in Table 8.The results above suggest that both per capita wealth and population play a role in increasing carbon dioxide emissions. In contrast, the energy intensity varied from year to year, contributing to a decrease in carbon emissions. From the effect-level perspective, population effect and intensity effect contribute more to ICE, whereas energy structure and population are relatively weak. This is consistent with Figure 4. In terms of the contributions of different effects, the largest cumulative effect contribution of ICE is per capita wealth, which was 1.23 in 2013. This is followed by energy intensity, with a cumulative effect contribution of −0.32. The cumulative effect contribution of energy structure and population are relatively small, at 0.01 and 0.08, respectively.
The energy structure is the weakest factor contributing to ICE and fluctuates greatly from year to year. The effects of energy structure are negative from 1996 to 2000, and in 2009, 2010, and 2012; this indicates that the energy structure contributes to a decreased ICE. In other years, the effects caused by energy structure are positive; despite some fluctuations, energy structure effects generally rise, although they fluctuate. This caused the ICE to increase by 24.95 million tons in 2011 and 53.33 million tons in 2013. This relates to the increasing consumption ratio of energy emissions from carbon sources such as coal. Reducing the consumption of carbon-emitting energies such as coal is conducive to curbing ICE. In terms of effect contributions, the energy structure is the lowest factor. This finding confirms that China should further optimize its energy consumption structure to disincentive rapid ICE growth.
Energy intensity plays a negative role with respect to ICE. In other words, energy intensity helped decrease the ICE except in years 2003, 2004, and 2013. The cumulative effects caused by the energy intensity of industrial output rose from 1995 to 2012, causing the ICE to decline by 3369.08 million tons. When considering the effects caused by energy type, ICE increases in stage 1, decreases in stage 2, and then increases again. Despite the fluctuations, ICE rose overall, to an amount of 2299.52 million tons. We can see that the effects of energy intensity on the ICE steadily increased from 1995 to 1998 and from 2004 to 2007, and declined during 1998–2004. The level fluctuated between 2007 and 2013.
Accumulated effects of different factors on ICE from industry varied in China are shown in Table 9.The cumulative effects of per capita wealth and population are positive values and contribute to the increase of ICE every year. Per capita wealth is rising by year, and the contribution of this factor is also the largest. This indicates that the increase in per capita wealth is the most important factor driving ICE increase. From 1995 to 2014, the effects of per capita wealth vary every year. In the first phase, from 1995 to 1999, the effects of per capita wealth declined steadily, dropping to the lowest point of 24,213 million tons in 1999. The Asian financial crisis in 1997 led to a decline in industrial output, leading to the low contribution of ICE in China. In the second phase, from 2000 to 2011, the overall trend was stable within a specific range of fluctuations. In the third phase, there was a rapid increase during the investigated period, with the contribution reaching the highest point of 901.22 million tons in 2007. In the fourth phase, from 2008 to 2013, the carbon emissions fluctuated, but rose overall, maintaining a high contribution level. The average contribution is up to 735.48 million tons.
However, population did not significantly impact carbon dioxide emissions, even though it did contribute to increased emissions. The cumulative contribution of the population effect is very small, indicating that increased population affected ICE only weakly. The cumulative contribution of population to ICE changed only slightly, with an initial increase of 33.08 million tons in 1995. Throughout the study period, the carbon dioxide emissions decreased by 635.91 million tons in 2013.
Figure 4 shows the factors’ contributions and effects more intuitively. The trends are consistent with Table 6 and Table 7. The largest contributing cumulative effect on ICE is per capita wealth, which was 1.23 in 2013. This was followed by energy intensity, with a cumulative effect contribution of −0.32. The cumulative effect contribution of energy structure and population are relatively small, at 0.01 and 0.08, respectively. Industrial output was the main driving force behind ICE. This factor and the relatively high energy intensity caused the increase during this period.

5. Conclusions

This study analyzed data from 1994 to 2013 to provide an overview of industrial carbon emissions, based on decoupling elasticity and using a Tapio decoupling model. The Kaya identity and LMDI (Log Mean Divisia Index) methods were used to identify the factors contributing to changes in China’s industrial carbon emissions. We also evaluated the accumulated effects and the contributions on ICE. Conclusions were developed based on the decoupling analysis and decomposition analysis. Proposals are made to curb the growth of carbon emissions and to balance economic development and environmental protection.
ICE from industrial sectors revealed a significant upward trend during the study period, reaching an amount of 11,147 million tons in 2013. The average annual growth rates for 1994–1997, 1998–1999, and 2000–2013 were 4.76%, −2.25%, and 9.23%, respectively. The stable low level of ICE in China can be mainly explained by the Asian financial crisis in 1997, which impacted China’s economy and resulted in a slow industrial growth rate in China.
When considering the decoupling relationship, “weak decoupling” and “expansive decoupling” were the main states during the studied period. The decoupling elasticity experienced an increasing trend from 0.65 to 2.24. This indicates that industrial growth was accompanied by significant pressure on the environment. Based on the decoupling analysis, the overall effect on industrial decoupling was still weak.
The per capita wealth of industrial output and energy intensity are major factors that influence carbon emissions. The per capita wealth of industrial output and population move in a consistent direction, and are always positive driving forces. By contrast, energy structure and energy intensity are mostly negative forces. Energy structure and population play a relatively unimportant role. In terms of contribution effects, the largest cumulative effect on ICE is per capita wealth, which was 1.23 in 2013. This factor is followed by energy intensity, with a cumulative contribution of −0.32. The cumulative contributions of energy structure and population are relatively small, at 0.01 and 0.08, respectively.
In conclusion, some critical approaches to reducing carbon emissions are to further expand industrial scales and improve industrial output. In addition, vigorously promoting optimization, upgrading traditionally high energy consuming enterprises, and cluster development may help inhibit carbon emissions growth. The energy intensity factor has been diminishing, resulting in a relative slow-down in the decrease of emissions. When compared with some developed countries, China’s energy intensity with respect to industrial output remains high. New strategies and increased efforts are needed to improve management and technological practices that will reduce energy intensity. Other approaches, such as further improving thermal power technologies and clean electricity, may also reduce carbon emission coefficients. The fastest way to significantly reduce carbon emissions in the short term is to adjust energy structures and optimize a sustainable energy consumption structure.

Acknowledgments

The current work is supported by the Recruitment Talent Fund of University of Petroleum (Huadong) (05Y16060020). We have received the grants in support of our research work. The funds we have received are for covering the costs to publish in open access.

Author Contributions

Qiang Wang conceived and designed the experiments and wrote the paper; Rongrong Li performed the experiments, analyzed the data, and contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Adom, P.K.; Bekoe, W.; Amuakwa-Mensah, F.; Mensah, J.T.; Botchway, E. Carbon dioxide emissions, economic growth, industrial structure, and technical efficiency: Empirical evidence from Ghana, Senegal, and Morocco on the causal dynamics. Energy 2012, 47, 314–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wang, Q.; Li, R. Natural gas from shale formation: A research profile. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 57, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Lu, Q.; Yang, H.; Huang, X.; Chuai, X.; Wu, C. Multi-sectoral decomposition in decoupling industrial growth from carbon emissions in the developed Jiangsu Province, China. Energy 2015, 82, 414–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Allen, S.K.; Plattner, G.K.; Nauels, A.; Xia, Y.; Stocker, T.F. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. An Overview of the Working Group 1 Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2014. Available online: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/ (accessed on 2 May 2014).
  5. Wang, Q.; Li, R. Drivers for energy consumption: A comparative analysis of China and India. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 62, 954–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Li, W.; Younger, P.L.; Cheng, Y.; Zhang, B.; Zhou, H.; Liu, Q.; Dai, T.; Kong, S.; Jin, K.; Yang, Q. Addressing the CO2 emissions of the world’s largest coal producer and consumer: Lessons from the Haishiwan Coalfield, China. Energy 2015, 80, 400–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Wang, T.; Watson, J. China’s Carbon emissions and international trade: Implications for post-2012 policy. Clim. Policy 2008, 8, 577–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhao, M.; Tan, L.; Zhang, W.; Ji, M.; Liu, Y.; Yu, L. Decomposing the influencing factors of industrial carbon emissions in Shanghai using the LMDI method. Energy 2010, 35, 2505–2510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wang, Q.; Li, R. Impact of cheaper oil on economic system and climate change: A SWOT analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 925–931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wang, Q.; Li, R. Journey to burning half of global coal: Trajectory and drivers of China’s coal use. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 58, 341–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, Q.; Liu, S.; Kong, L. Decomposition and Decoupling Analysis of Energy-Related Carbon Emissions from China Manufacturing. Math. Probl. Eng. 2015, 1, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wang, Q.; Li, R. Cheaper Oil: A turning point in Paris climate talk? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 52, 1186–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wang, Q.; Chen, X. Energy policies for managing China’s carbon emission. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 50, 470–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wang, Q. Cheaper oil challenge and opportunity for climate change. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 1997–1998. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  15. Wang, Q. China should aim for a total cap on emissions. Nature 2014, 512, 115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Wang, Q. China has the capacity to lead in carbon trading. Nature 2013, 493, 273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Wang, Q. China’s citizens must act to save their environment. Nature 2013, 497, 159–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Wang, Q.; Chen, X. China’s electricity market-oriented reform: From an absolute to a relative monopoly. Energy Policy 2012, 51, 143–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Shahbaz, M.; Ozturk, I.; Afza, T.; Ali, A. Revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve in a global economy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 25, 494–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Leitão, N.C. Economic Growth, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Renewable Energy and Globalization. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2014, 4, 391–399. [Google Scholar]
  21. Leitão, N.C.; Shahbaz, M. Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Urbanization and Globalization: A Dynamic Panel Data. Econ. Res. Guard. 2013, 3, 22–32. [Google Scholar]
  22. Sun, J. Accounting for energy use in China, 1980–94. Energy 1998, 23, 835–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ma, C.; Stern, D.I. China’s changing energy intensity trend: A decomposition analysis. Energy Econ. 2008, 30, 1037–1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Liao, H.; Wei, Y.-M. China’s energy consumption: A perspective from Divisia aggregation approach. Energy 2010, 35, 28–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wang, Q.; Li, R. Sino-Venezuelan oil-for-loan deal—The Chinese strategic gamble? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 64, 817–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Paul, S.; Bhattacharya, R.N. CO2 Emission from energy use in India: A Decomposition analysis. Energy Policy 2004, 32, 585–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Shahbaz, M.; Mallick, H.; Mahalik, M.K.; Sadorsky, P. The role of globalization on the recent evolution of energy demand in India: Implications for sustainable development. Energy Econ. 2016, 55, 52–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Shahbaz, M.; Loganathan, N.; Muzaffar, A.T.; Ahmed, K.; Jabran, M.A. How urbanization affects CO2 emissions in Malaysia? The application of STIRPAT model. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 57, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Shahbaz, M.; Hye, Q.M.A.; Tiwari, A.K.; Leitão, N.C. Economic growth, energy consumption, financial development, international trade and CO2 emissions in Indonesia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 25, 109–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Shahbaz, M.; Leitão, N.C. Portuguese carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: A time series analysis. Bull. Energy Econ. 2013, 1, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  31. Lise, W. Decomposition of CO2 emissions over 1980–2003 in Turkey. Energy Policy 2006, 34, 1841–1852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Magazzino, C. The relationship between real GDP, CO2 emissions, and energy use in the GCC countries: A time series approach. Cogent Econ. Financ. 2016, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Magazzino, C. Is Per Capita Energy Use Stationary? Panel Data Evidence for the EMU Countries. Energy Explor. Exploit. 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Magazzino, C. Economic growth, CO2 emissions and energy use in Israel. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2015, 22, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Magazzino, C. A Panel VAR Approach of the Relationship among Economic Growth, CO2 Emissions, and Energy Use in the ASEAN-6 Countries. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2014, 4, 546–553. [Google Scholar]
  36. Wang, Z.; Yang, L. Delinking indicators on regional industry development and carbon emissions: Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei economic band case. Ecol. Indic. 2015, 48, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Blesl, M.; Das, A.; Fahl, U.; Remme, U. Role of energy efficiency standards in reducing CO2 emissions in Germany: An assessment with TIMES. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 772–785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lin, W.; Yang, J.; Chen, B. Temporal and spatial analysis of integrated energy and environment efficiency in China based on a green GDP index. Energies 2011, 4, 1376–1390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Huang, J.; Yang, X.; Cheng, G.; Wang, S. A comprehensive eco-efficiency model and dynamics of regional eco-efficiency in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 67, 228–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, Z.; Feng, C. Sources of production inefficiency and productivity growth in China: A global data envelopment analysis. Energy Econ. 2015, 49, 380–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wang, K.; Wei, Y.-M.; Zhang, X. A comparative analysis of China’s regional energy and emission performance: Which is the better way to deal with undesirable outputs? Energy Policy 2012, 46, 574–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Chung, W.; Kam, M.; Ip, C. A study of residential energy use in Hong Kong by decomposition analysis, 1990–2007. Appl. Energy 2011, 88, 5180–5187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Leitão, N.C. Energy Consumption and Foreign Direct Investment: A Panel Data Analysis for Portugal. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2015, 5, 138–147. [Google Scholar]
  44. Wu, L.; Kaneko, S.; Matsuoka, S. Driving forces behind the stagnancy of China’s energy-related CO2 emissions from 1996 to 1999: The relative importance of structural change, intensity change and scale change. Energy Policy 2005, 33, 319–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Wang, C.; Chen, J.; Zou, J. Decomposition of energy-related CO2 emission in China: 1957–2000. Energy 2005, 30, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Zhang, M.; Mu, H.; Ning, Y. Accounting for energy-related CO2 emission in China, 1991–2006. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 767–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Fan, Y.; Liu, L.-C.; Wu, G.; Tsai, H.-T.; Wei, Y.-M. Changes in carbon intensity in China: Empirical findings from 1980–2003. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 62, 683–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Wang, W.; Zhang, M.; Zhou, M. Using LMDI method to analyze transport sector CO2 emissions in China. Energy 2011, 36, 5909–5915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Scholl, L.; Schipper, L.; Kiang, N. CO2 emissions from passenger transport: A comparison of international trends from 1973 to 1992. Energy Policy 1996, 24, 17–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Schipper, L.; Scholl, L.; Price, L. Energy use and carbon emissions from freight in 10 industrialized countries: An analysis of trends from 1973 to 1992. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 1997, 2, 57–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lakshmanan, T.; Han, X. Factors underlying transportation CO2 emissions in the USA: A decomposition analysis. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 1997, 2, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China. The 2000 China Statistical Yearbook; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2000. (In Chinese)
  53. National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China. The 2005 China Statistical Yearbook; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2005. (In Chinese)
  54. National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China. The 2010 China Statistical Yearbook; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2010. (In Chinese)
  55. National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China. The 2013 China Statistical Yearbook; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2013. (In Chinese)
  56. Wang, Q.; Chen, X.; Jha, A.N.; Rogers, H. Natural gas from shale formation–the evolution, evidences and challenges of shale gas revolution in United States. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 30, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Wang, Q. Nuclear safety lies in greater transparency. Nature 2013, 494, 403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Wang, Q.; Chen, X. Regulatory transparency—How China can learn from Japan’s nuclear regulatory failures? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 3574–3578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wang, Q.; Chen, X. Regulatory failures for nuclear safety–the bad example of Japan–implication for the rest of world. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 2610–2617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Wang, Q.; Chen, X. Nuclear accident like Fukushima unlikely in the rest of the world? Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 9831–9832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Wang, Q. Effective policies for renewable energy—The example of China’s wind power—lessons for China’s photovoltaic power. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010, 14, 702–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ang, B.W.; Liu, F.; Chew, E.P. Perfect decomposition techniques in energy and environmental analysis. Energy Policy 2003, 31, 1561–1566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ang, B.W. Decomposition analysis for policymaking in energy: Which is the preferred method? Energy Policy 2004, 32, 1131–1139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Ang, B.; Liu, N. Energy decomposition analysis: IEA model versus other methods. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 1426–1432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. De Freitas, L.C.; Kaneko, S. Decomposing the decoupling of CO2 emissions and economic growth in Brazil. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70, 1459–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Wood, R.; Lenzen, M. Zero-value problems of the logarithmic mean divisia index decomposition method. Energy Policy 2006, 34, 1326–1331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ang, B.W. The LMDI approach to decomposition analysis: A practical guide. Energy Policy 2005, 33, 867–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Kaya, Y. Impact of Carbon Dioxide Emission Control on GNP Growth: Interpretation of Proposed Scenarios. Available online: http://www.scirp.org/(S(czeh2tfqyw2orz553k1w0r45))/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?ReferenceID=1021752 (assessed on 26 September 2016).
  69. Gray, D.; Anable, J.; Illingworth, L.; Graham, W. Decoupling the Link between Economic Growth, Transport Growth and Carbon Emissions in Scotland. 2006. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267221393 (accessed on 31 December 2014).
  70. Li, W.; Sun, S.; Li, H. Decomposing the decoupling relationship between energy-related CO2 emissions and economic growth in China. Nat. Hazards 2015, 79, 977–997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Wang, Q.; Chen, X.; Xu, Y.-C. Accident like the Fukushima unlikely in a country with effective nuclear regulation: Literature review and proposed guidelines. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 17, 126–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Wang, Q.; Chen, X. Rethinking and reshaping the climate policy: Literature review and proposed guidelines. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 21, 469–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Aiwen, Z.; Dong, L. Empirical Analysis on Decoupling Relationship Between Carbon Emission and Economic Growth in China. Technol. Econ. 2013, 1, 019. [Google Scholar]
  74. Tapio, P. Towards a theory of decoupling: Degrees of decoupling in the EU and the case of road traffic in Finland between 1970 and 2001. Transp. Policy 2005, 12, 137–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Arrow, K.; Bolin, B.; Costanza, R.; Dasgupta, P. Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment. Science 1995, 268, 520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. De Bruyn, S.M.; van den Bergh, J.C.; Opschoor, J.B. Economic growth and emissions: Reconsidering the empirical basis of environmental Kuznets curves. Ecol. Econ. 1998, 25, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. United States Agency for International Development. GHG Protocol Tool for Energy Consumption in China. 2013. Available online: http://www.ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools/all-tools/ (accessed on 26 September 2016).
  78. Mackinnon, J.G. Numerical distribution functions for unit root and cointegration tests. J. Appl. Econ. 1996, 11, 601–618. [Google Scholar]
  79. Tiwari, A.K.; Shahbaz, M. Revisiting Purchasing Power Parity for India using threshold cointegration and nonlinear unit root test. Econ. Chang. Restruct. 2013, 47, 117–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Brizga, J.; Feng, K.; Hubacek, K. Drivers of CO2 emissions in the former Soviet Union: A country level IPAT analysis from 1990 to 2010. Energy 2013, 59, 743–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Diakoulaki, D.; Mandaraka, M. Decomposition analysis for assessing the progress in decoupling industrial growth from CO2 emissions in the EU manufacturing sector. Energy Econ. 2007, 29, 636–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Decoupling between carbon emissions from industry and economic growth.
Figure 1. Decoupling between carbon emissions from industry and economic growth.
Sustainability 08 01059 g001
Figure 2. ICE from the industrial sector rose during the study period 1994–2013.
Figure 2. ICE from the industrial sector rose during the study period 1994–2013.
Sustainability 08 01059 g002
Figure 3. The decoupling elasticity of the industry sector during the period 1995–2013.
Figure 3. The decoupling elasticity of the industry sector during the period 1995–2013.
Sustainability 08 01059 g003
Figure 4. The contributions of different factors on ICE varied in China year by year.
Figure 4. The contributions of different factors on ICE varied in China year by year.
Sustainability 08 01059 g004
Table 1. The carbon coefficients of different kinds of energy.
Table 1. The carbon coefficients of different kinds of energy.
EnergyDefault Value of Carbon ContentCarbon Oxidation RateAverage Lower Heating ValueCarbon Coefficient
tC/TJ%kJ/kg or kJ/m3kgCO2/kg or kgCO2/m3
Raw Coal26.3798%20,9081.981
Washed coal25.4198%26,3442.405
Other washed coal25.4198%10,4540.955
Coal products33.698%17,7932.148
#: briquette33.690%17,5841.950
coal water slurry33.698%19,8542.397
Pulverized coal33.698%20,9332.527
Coke29.593%28,4352.860
Natural Gas15.399%389,31021.622
Liquefied natural gas15.3100%51,4982.889
Crude Oil20.198%41,8163.020
Gasoline18.998%43,0702.925
Kerosene19.698%43,0703.033
Diesel Oil20.298%42,6523.096
Fuel Oil21.198%41,8163.170
Liquefied petroleum gas17.298%50,1793.101
Refinery Gas18.298%46,0553.012
Other petroleum products20.098%35,1682.527
Table 2. ADF Unite root test.
Table 2. ADF Unite root test.
ItemTest Value of ADFCritical ValueJudging Conclusion
The logarithmC3.548228−2.655194Nonstationary
e−3.381739−3.040391 **Stationary
a−54.84574−3.831511 ***Stationary
P0.361199−2.660551Nonstationary
n1−0.926663−2.655194Nonstationary
n2−0.875207−2.655194Nonstationary
n3−2.292157−2.666593Nonstationary
n4−1.151329−2.660551Nonstationary
n5−1.003078−2.660551Nonstationary
n6−0.145338−2.655194Nonstationary
n7−0.718707−2.655194Nonstationary
n81.657641−2.655194Nonstationary
First-order differenceC−0.328314−2.666593Nonstationary
P−2.734556−2.660551 *Stationary
n1−2.335950−2.660551Nonstationary
n2−3.367909−3.040391 **Stationary
n3−2.330250−2.660551Nonstationary
n4−3.946359−3.857386 ***Stationary
n5−2.656369−2.660551Nonstationary
n6−4.781514−3.857386 ***Stationary
n7−3.861933−3.857386 ***Stationary
n8−3.124053−3.040391 **Stationary
Second-order differenceC−4.264208−3.886751 ***Stationary
n1−4.958637−3.886751 ***Stationary
n3−5.720148−3.886751 ***Stationary
n5−5.429637−3.886751 ***Stationary
*, **, and *** indicate the effect is significant at the 10%, 5%, and 1% level.
Table 3. The results of cointegration testing.
Table 3. The results of cointegration testing.
Hypothesized No. of CE(s)Eigen ValueTrace Statistic0.05 Critical ValueProb. **
None *0.957631117.648347.856130.0000
At most 1 *0.79890460.7442929.797070.0000
At most 2 *0.74566731.8728115.494710.0001
At most 3 *0.3307527.2288213.8414660.0072
Trace test indicates at least three cointegrating equations at the 0.01 level; * denotes rejection of the hypothesis at the 0.01 level; ** MacKinnon, Haug, and Michelis (1999) p-values.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics on the variables.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics on the variables.
MeanStandard DeviationVarianceKurtosisSkewnessMinimumMaximumConfidence (95%)
C563,331.074840257,289.67767166,197,978,236.160500−0.7854340.701214300,319.0426501,114,708.900140120,415.275773
P129,022.9000004909.38048324,102,016.726316−0.951182−0.357183119,850.000000136,072.0000002297.660793
a4749.5595422662.8639257,090,844.283580−0.8302780.6732451621.2932839971.6302431246.258679
e0.0003810.0000890.0000000.8322221.3583770.0002880.0005910.000042
n10.6534980.0199370.000397−0.212380−0.7767010.6136480.6822830.009331
n20.0903630.0131670.000173−1.8813570.2459450.0744780.1097830.006163
n30.1921580.0200630.000403−0.4833700.7162420.1641700.2318550.009390
n40.0053660.0027600.000008−1.3965610.3824090.0018250.0100650.001292
n50.0004720.0002980.000000−1.1942230.4701020.0000960.0009570.000140
n60.0134230.0039170.000015−0.718475−0.4787730.0057860.0190910.001833
n70.0237790.0120100.000144−1.675945−0.1297220.0072780.0414380.005621
n80.0209430.0053540.0000290.1191940.9728470.0145760.0324830.002506
Table 5. Correlation analysis between different variables.
Table 5. Correlation analysis between different variables.
Paen1n2n3n4n5n6n7n8
CO20.904 **0.99 **−0.666 **0.505 *0.901 **−0.464 *−0.876 **−0.817 **−0.914 **−0.949 **0.941 **
P0.935 **−0.909 **0.1420.858 **−0.088−0.968 **−0.573 **−0.716 **−0.955 **0.890 **
a−0.743 **0.3970.876 **−0.355−0.886 **−0.745 **−0.880 **−0.951 **0.970 **
e0.260−0.628 **−0.3090.843 **0.1940.4100.773 **−0.744 **
n10.465 *−0.982 **−0.180−0.838 **−0.649 **−0.3800.280
n2−0.469 **−0.879 **−0.808 **−0.857 **−0.935 **0.789 **
n30.1290.810 **0.645 **0.328−0.256
n40.622 **0.708 **0.935 **−0.816 **
n50.869 **0.753 **−0.629 **
n60.806 **−0.844 **
n7−0.870 **
** Significant correlation at the 0.01 level (two-tailed); * Significant correlation at the 0.05 level (two-tailed).
Table 6. The carbon emissions from different kinds of energy in the industrial sector in China.
Table 6. The carbon emissions from different kinds of energy in the industrial sector in China.
YearThe Carbon Emissions from Different Kinds of EnergyTotal
Raw CoalCokeCrude OilGasolineKeroseneDiesel OilFuel OilNatural Gas10 Thousand Tons
1994213,49225,17442,180219387340410,5563233300,319
1995232,90829,77844,4432376136368410,7983338327,461
1996245,41830,00547,3862620131420210,1653399343,324
1997241,03030,27151,9372115141535710,2173653344,721
1998227,72130,63252,0121982189416710,1993708330,609
1999223,37228,86156,7011891238466596613896329,285
2000221,33728,83063,5771761255494394314368334,502
2001225,05730,42663,9281808261507098744709341,134
2002246,03134,25767,5201849265536393544920369,558
2003298,27640,46974,8011807266566710,2615791437,337
2004356,84848,56686,4491484185620711,3186349517,406
2005401,04262,80890,4771351174647595897650579,565
2006446,79378,16096,8861370146607396248951648,004
2007485,88586,035102,28116801375334835011,020700,723
2008526,10285,104106,70417141497793646511,494745,526
2009554,45990,786114,6851963977272482312,495786,581
2010586,43996,049129,00420171226699753614,860842,726
2011646,262108,829132,45917691045648716518,161920,396
2012665,051112,291140,6101700975411710620,471952,736
2013798,654130,685146,4801531835189767524,4131,114,709
Table 7. The values of decoupling elasticity.
Table 7. The values of decoupling elasticity.
Year∆Carbon/CarbonIOV/IOVεStatus
19950.09040.14000.6456weak decoupling
19960.04840.12500.3875weak decoupling
19970.00410.11300.0360weak decoupling
1998−0.04090.0890−0.4600strong decoupling
1999−0.00400.0850−0.0471strong decoupling
20000.01580.09800.1617weak decoupling
20010.01980.08700.2279weak decoupling
20020.08330.10000.8332expansive decoupling
20030.18340.12801.4329expansive negative decoupling
20040.18310.11501.5920expansive negative decoupling
20050.12010.11601.0357expansive decoupling
20060.11810.12900.9154expansive decoupling
20070.08140.14900.5460weak decoupling
20080.06390.09900.6458weak decoupling
20090.05510.08800.6258weak decoupling
20100.07140.12600.5665weak decoupling
20110.09220.10800.8534expansive decoupling
20120.03510.07900.4448weak decoupling
20130.17000.07602.2369expansive negative decoupling
Table 8. The effects of different factors on ICE varied in China year by year.
Table 8. The effects of different factors on ICE varied in China year by year.
YearCnCeCaCpC
1995816.7404−14,773.891137,790.64483308.926427,142.4205
1996−111.6941−23,519.356436,001.92933492.085915,862.9648
1997−1538.3893−33,887.433333,363.81403458.86551396.8570
1998−492.9173−42,401.306625,696.46803085.1055−14,112.6504
1999−1647.0613−26,588.856324,213.07792699.1920−1323.6478
2000−1876.3224−23,928.621628,506.90822514.97815216.9423
2001113.2695−21,661.278525,832.01872347.89826631.9079
20021024.6759−6448.536731,556.62452290.998328,423.7621
20031885.997917,421.389946,054.82162417.652167,779.8615
20041405.225926,825.562049,041.30972796.102480,068.2000
20052894.1806−844.201056,883.00053226.355962,159.3360
20062048.6282−7,990.708571,145.36743235.821368,439.1083
2007859.7207−41,745.653390,122.19573482.498752,718.7618
2008379.9409−23,801.845364,553.62033671.847544,803.5634
2009−46.8693−23,487.167860,860.56093727.573541,054.0972
2010−2770.9293−37,706.369092,720.80063901.478856,144.9810
20112495.6581−15,163.464186,117.73314220.393477,670.3205
2012−1655.7798−37,206.514966,564.23604638.238132,340.1793
20135333.784081,090.846070,472.63155075.6306161,972.8921
Table 9. Accumulated effects of different factors on ICE varied in China.
Table 9. Accumulated effects of different factors on ICE varied in China.
YearCnCeCaCpC
1995816.7404−14,773.937,790.643308.92627,142.42
1996705.0464−38,293.273,792.576801.01243,005.39
1997−833.343−72,180.7107,156.410,259.8844,402.24
1998−1326.26−114,582132,852.913,344.9830,289.59
1999−2973.32−141,171157,065.916,044.1828,965.94
2000−4849.64−165,099185,572.818,559.1534,182.89
2001−4736.37−186,761211,404.920,907.0540,814.79
2002−3711.7−193,209242,961.523,198.0569,238.56
2003−1825.7−175,788289,016.325,615.7137,018.4
2004−420.475−148,962338,057.628,411.8217,086.6
20052473.706−149,807394,940.631,638.16279,246
20064522.334−157,797466,08634,873.98347,685.1
20075382.055−199,543556,208.238,356.48400,403.8
20085761.996−223,345620,761.842,028.33445,207.4
20095715.126−246,832681,622.445,755.9486,261.5
20102944.197−284,538774,343.249,657.38542,406.5
20115439.855−299,702860,460.953,877.77620,076.8
20123784.075−336,908927,025.158,516.01652,417
20139117.859−255,817997,497.863,591.64814,389.9

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, Q.; Li, R.; Jiang, R. Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis of Carbon Emissions from Industry: A Case Study from China. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1059. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8101059

AMA Style

Wang Q, Li R, Jiang R. Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis of Carbon Emissions from Industry: A Case Study from China. Sustainability. 2016; 8(10):1059. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8101059

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Qiang, Rongrong Li, and Rui Jiang. 2016. "Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis of Carbon Emissions from Industry: A Case Study from China" Sustainability 8, no. 10: 1059. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8101059

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop