Published October 2013 | Version v1
Journal article

Regional disparity and cost-effective SO2 pollution control in China: A case study in 5 mega-cities

  • 1. National Institute for Environmental Studies, 16-2 Onogawa, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8506 (Japan)
  • 2. Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya City 464-8601 (Japan)
  • 3. Mitsubishi Research Institute Inc., 2-10-3 Nagatacho, Chiyoda-Ku, Tokyo 100-8141 (Japan)
  • 4. Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, No. 72 Wenhua Road, Shenyang 110016 (China)

Description

With rapid development, increasing sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission becomes a key environmental issue in China. To respond to this challenge, the Chinese government established a top-down scheme to reduce its SO2 emissions. However, regional disparity and the associated cost differences brought uncertainties to the policy effectiveness and efficiency. Few studies focus on this field. Therefore, this study tries to fill such a gap by investigating the differences of SO2 emissions, reduction potential, and cost-effectiveness through use of the GAINS-China model in five mega-cities in China, namely, Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin, Chongqing, and Hong Kong. A scenario analysis approach is employed, focusing on two technologies named flue gas desulfurization (FGD) and limestone injection (LINJ). Results demonstrated that a large SO2 reduction potential exists, as well as a great disparity, among the five mega-cities. Chongqing had the largest reduction potential with lowest unit cost, while Beijng and Hong Kong showed the lowest reduction potential with higher unit cost. In Beijing and Shanghai, FGD and LINJ in the power generation sector had the larger reduction potential with the highest cost-effectiveness. However, in Chongqing, the industry sectors also had large reduction potentials. Finally, appropriate SO2 control strategies and policies are raised by considering the local realities. - Highlights: • The cost-effectiveness of SO2 control policy was analyzed in five mega-cities in China. • Reduction potential and cost-effectiveness were closely linked to regional disparity. • Beijing and Hong Kong showed lower reduction potential and higher marginal reduction cost. • Chongqing showed the largest reduction potential and the lowest marginal reduction cost

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.105

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.105;
PII
S0301-4215(13)00460-6;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Energy Policy
Journal Volume
61
Journal Page Range
p. 1322-1331
ISSN
0301-4215
CODEN
ENPYAC

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2013 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.