海南省房间空调行业温室气体协同减排潜力和效益分析

基于建立的需求-排放-成本模型,结合情景分析,评估海南省房间空调行业温室气体协同减排潜力与成本。研究表明,海南省房间空调器行业在氢氟碳化物(HFCs)制冷剂转型的同时推进能效提升,既可大幅度减少直接和间接排放,实现房间空调制冷剂近零排放,同时通过节电获得相对收益。在基加利修正案能效情景与加速转型能效情景中,2021—2060年海南省房间空调器行业可分别累计减排50～62MtCO₂-eq和77～94MtCO₂-eq,直接减排量占比分别约为30%和55%,平均减排成本分别为-219.3～-219.1元/t和-115.6～-112.8元/t。     

基于多目标规划的中国二氧化碳减排的宏观经济成本估计

CO₂减排的宏观经济代价对处于不同发展阶段的国家有着巨大的差异,对此给出科学的估计具有重要的科学和现实意义。本文运用基于投入产出的多目标规划对中国CO₂减排的宏观经济成本进行了估算。结果表明：CO₂排放控制对我国经济的影响十分显著,在目前条件下,我国2010年CO₂减排的宏观经济成本为3100～4024元/t CO₂;而且减排的力度越大,相应的单位减排的宏观经济成本越高。采掘业、石油行业、化学工业、金属冶炼等行业和部门是CO₂的高排放部门,但同时也是实现减排较有潜力的部门。     

江苏经济增长质量和效益评价模型与实证分析

随着发展观的转变,经济增长质量和效益已成为人们关注的热点问题.从经济增长质量内涵的界定出发,结合江苏经济增长实际,建立了由7个2级指标、16个3级指标组成的经济增长质量与效益综合评价指标体系,采用主成分-聚类分析和改进的灰色关联分析方法相结合,对江苏省经济增长质量进行实证分析研究.结果表明:2004-2009年江苏省各年度经济增长质量与效益整体上呈逐年趋好态势.当前,江苏发展所面临的主要问题是经济增长效益不高,必须采取有效措施加以解决,确保经济持续稳定增长.     

基于敏感源分析的动态大气污染排放方案模拟

选取2014年11月6—11日一次典型污染过程,以北京城区为重点关注的目标区域,基于印痕分析技术判别对该区域影响较大的敏感源区,设计重点区域减排试验和敏感源区逐日动态减排试验,利用区域化学传输模式WRF-Chem进行模拟对比。结果显示:上述两种方案对源强较高的减排当地PM_2.5浓度降低均有明显的改善作用,且在传输作用下会辐射影响到下游地区;但仅就目标区域而言,敏感源区减排方案的减排效率要远远高于重点区域减排方案。为了验证基于敏感源分析的动态减排方法的适用性,进一步开展了不同季节以及不同背景浓度的个例模拟。结果表明:基于敏感源区分析结果制定动态逐日减排措施,可降低削减成本、提高减排效率,以达到最具经济环境效益的减排效果。     

中国夏季不同强度降水模拟对不同积云对流参数化方案的敏感性研究

利用PσRCM9区域气候模式, 分析了中国夏季不同强度降水模拟对不同积云对流参数化方案的敏感性。结果表明, 采用四种积云对流参数化方案, 模式能够模拟出小雨、 大雨和暴雨的雨量百分比和雨日百分比空间分布的一致性特征, 但不能模拟出中雨雨量百分比和雨日百分比空间分布的相似性, 这是由于模式不能模拟中雨雨量百分比的空间分布形式所致。还发现模拟的我国夏季降水以小雨和中雨为主, 四种积云对流参数化方案均低估了中国夏季大雨和暴雨对总降水的贡献, 尤其是在我国西部、 东北和华北地区更明显。不同积云对流参数化方案下模拟的极端强降水阈值的空间分布形式基本与观测一致, 但强度与观测存在较大差异。相比较而言, Grell方案较Kuo、 Anthes-Kuo和Betts-Mille积云对流参数化方案更适合中国东南部地区夏季极端强降水的模拟。     

不同初值和降水方案对一次西南涡暴雨过程的中尺度模拟与分析

用GRAPES_meso数值模式和LAPS中尺度局地分析资料,对2.5 km和5 km两种分辨率,采用NCEP 3-class降水方案和2种混合降水方案,给定不同的spin up时间,设计18种组合方案,对2008年7月一次西南涡暴雨过程做数值模拟。在模拟可信的前提下,对西南涡暴雨的天气学成因进行分析。模拟试验表明,L...     

基于不同参数化方案的高速公路大雾过程的数值模拟试验

为了比较不同微物理方案、边界层方案和陆面方案对大雾过程模拟效果的影响,本文利用WRF模式(Weather Research and Forecasting Model)对江苏省高速公路网2011—2013年发生的21场大雾过程进行了数值模拟,探讨了模式不同参数化方案对大雾过程数值模拟的影响,确定了基于模式输出结果的成雾判别指标。研究结果表明:(1)综合考虑微物理方案、边界层方案和陆面方案对地面气象要素、高空温度及雾区分布等要素的影响,微物理方案选用WDM6方案,边界层方案选用QNSE方案,陆面方案选用SLAB方案时,雾的数值模拟效果最优;(2)在最优参数化方案设置下,兼顾气象业务部门有限的计算资源和较高的模式垂直分辨率,对21个大雾个例发生的大气背景进行数值模拟和诊断分析后发现:江苏省境内雾的预报指标应为模式最低层(30~40 m高度)液态含水量0.015 g·kg~(-1),或2 m相对湿度95%,且10 m风速3 m·s~(-1)。     

不同微物理方案和边界层方案对超强台风“鲇鱼”路径和强度模拟的影响分析

采用分辨率为1 °×1 °的NCEP全球格点再分析资料,应用新一代中尺度数值预报模式WRF V3.2,对比分析了不同微物理方案和边界层方案对2010年1013号超强台风“鲇鱼”路径和强度模拟的影响。结果表明：相对于边界层方案,微物理方案对台风路径的影响较大,其中与Ferrier方案相组合的试验中模拟的台风路径平均偏差最小;边界层方案对台风强度有明显影响,其中MYNN2方案模拟的台风强度变化与实况更接近。进一步对比分析了不同微物理方案和边界层方案对大尺度环流形势场、水汽通量场及台风暖心结构模拟的异同,探讨不同参数化方案对台风路径和强度模拟差异的动热力原因。分析表明：不同微物理方案在模拟副热带高压和东亚长波槽的演变特征上是不同的,于是导致对台风路径模拟的差异;不同边界层方案对边界层中水汽通量大小的模拟存在显著差异,而水汽供应的强弱会影响台风上层暖心结构的不同,从而导致对台风强度模拟的差异。     

CALMET模式不同参数化方案对江西省山地风场模拟的对比分析

通过降尺度模式CALMET不同参数化方案对江西山地风场测风塔风速风向模拟结果的对比分析,选取出适合山地风场模拟的最优参数化方案,并进行连续一年的模拟效果检验。结果表明:CALMET模式以不采用地形动力效应参数调整和Froude数调整,采用下坡气流效应调整和O’Brien垂直风速调整时,对江西省境内山地风场50 m以上高度层风场模拟效果最佳。最优参数化方案不仅能较好地模拟出山地风场测风塔逐时风速,并且对全年风速段分布模拟有较好的结果。CALMET模式能模拟出实际测风塔全年主导风向,但模拟与实测结果主导风向分布约有一个方位的偏差,主导风向频率有7%~8%的偏差。     

不同参数化方案对安徽一次暴雨过程模拟的影响分析

使用WRF v3.4模式对2012年7月12—14日安徽的一次暴雨进行模拟。保持其他参数如辐射、陆面过程等不变, 将不同微物理过程(Eta、Kessler、Lin方案)与积云参数方案(KF、BMJ、GD方案)进行组合成9个试验。将试验模拟结果与实况进行对比分析, 发现:微物理方案的选取对于降水的雨强、位置、雨区范围的模拟都有一定的影响。积云参数化方案对于降水的范围, 雨带的位置模拟也都有影响, 但对于雨强的影响不大。将各试验模拟的逐小时降水与实况进行比较, 发现试验Eta-GD和Lin-GD模拟降水日变化与实况更接近。通过TS评分、ETS评分和系统偏差分析, 表明试验Eta-GD在此次暴雨过程的降水模拟中表现最好。     

欧盟"气候行动与可再生能源综合计划"建议草案:核心要点与战略意义

概述了欧盟"气候行动与可再生能源综合计划"建议草案的出台背景、核心要点和主要内容,评价了各方反应及该建议草案的优点和缺点,分析了该建议草案与<京都议定书>第二承诺期气候谈判的联系及其对碳市场的影响.最后,针对中国参与清洁发展机制(CDM)活动,提出了个人的思考和建泌.     

Experts talk the future Reflections on the Bonn Seminar of Governmental Experts, 16–17 May 2005: a view from Europe

Abstract

This article provides a first-cut estimate of the potential impacts of the clean development mechanism (CDM) on electricity generation and carbon emissions in the power sector of non-Annex 1 countries. We construct four illustrative CDM regimes that represent a range of approaches under consideration within the climate community. We examine the impact of these CDM regimes on investments in new generation, under illustrative carbon trading prices of US$ 10 and 100/t C. In the cases that are most conducive to CDM activity, roughly 94% of new generation investments remains identical to the without-CDM situation, with only 6% shifting from higher to lower carbon intensity technologies.We estimate that the CDM would bolster renewable energy generation by as little as 15% at US$ 10/t C, or as much as 300% at US$ 100/t C.

A striking finding comes from our examination of the potential magnitude of the “free-rider” problem, i.e. crediting of activities that will occur even in the absence of the CDM. The CDM is intended to be globally carbon-neutral—a project reduces emissions in the host country but generates credits that increase emissions in the investor country. However, to the extent that unwarranted credits are awarded to non-additional projects, the CDM would increase global carbon emissions above the without-CDM emissions level. Under two of the CDM regimes considered, cumulative free-riders credits total 250–600 MtC through the end of the first budget period in 2012. This represents 10–23% of the likely OECD emissions reduction requirement during the first budget period. Since such a magnitude of free-rider credits from non-additional CDM projects could threaten the environmental integrity of the Kyoto protocol, it is imperative that policy makers devise CDM rules that encourage legitimate projects, while effectively screening out non-additional activities.     

Assessing the additionality of CDM projects: practical experiences and lessons learned

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol allows industrialized countries to use credits from greenhouse gas (GHG) abatement projects in developing countries. A key requirement of the CDM is that the emission reductions be real, measurable and additional. This article evaluates how the additionality of CDM projects has been assessed in practice. The analysis is mainly based on a systematic evaluation of 93 registered CDM projects and comes to the conclusion that the current tools for demonstrating additionality are in need of substantial improvement. In particular, the application of the barrier analysis is highly subjective and difficult to validate in an objective and transparent manner. Key assumptions regarding additionality are often not substantiated with credible, documented evidence. In a considerable number of cases it is questionable whether the emission reductions are actually additional. Based on these findings, practical recommendations for improving the assessment of additionality are provided.     

LULUCF-based CDM: too much ado for…a small carbon market

Abstract

The Bonn agreement reached in July at the sixth conference of the parties (COP) to the FCCC states “that for the first commitment period, the total of additions to and subtractions from the assigned amount of a party resulting from eligible LULUCF activities under Article 12 (i.e. CDM), shall not exceed 1% of base-year emissions of that party, times five”. The most probable size of this LULUCF-CDM market is analyzed in light of each Annex I party's actual and projected emissions and policies. Results show that the market size would be only about 110 Mt CO₂ eq. for 2000–2012, representing a maximum global market value of about US$ 876 million.     

Estimating the CDM market under the Marrakech Accords

Abstract

The agreement on implementation of the Kyoto Protocol achieved at COP7 in Marrakech has important implications for investment in greenhouse gas emission reduction projects in developing countries through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). The required actual emission reductions for participating Annex B countries overall will be relatively small, as the United States do not intend to ratify the protocol and significant amounts of carbon sequestered in domestic sinks can be credited. In addition, the potential supply of surplus emission permits (hot air) from Russia and other economies in transition may be as high as total demand in the first commitment period. Thus, even under restraint of hot air sellers, CDM demand will be limited, and a low demand, low price carbon market scenario appears likely.

The magnitude of the CDM will be influenced by a host of factors both on the demand and the supply-side. We analyse these using a quantitative model of the global carbon market, based on marginal abatement cost curves. Implementation and transaction costs, as well as baseline and additionality rules affect the CDM's share in the carbon market. Demand for the CDM is sensitive to changes in business-as-usual emissions growth in participating Annex B countries, and also to crediting for additional sinks. Permit supply from Russia and other economies in transition is possibly the most crucial factor in the carbon market.