不同气候保护政策的模拟对比研究

气候变化问题已经成为制约经济发展、影响社会福利的重要因素。如何在经济稳定发展的前提下实行有效的气候保护政策是一个重要的研究课题。以State-Contingent模型和Demeter模型为基础建立一个宏观动态模型。该模型主要包括三个模块：宏观经济模块．气候变化模块．人地关系协调的决策选择模块．以此分析不同气候保护政策对经济的影响。模型在考虑了增汇、技术进步等因素的基础上．针对生产型、增汇型、能源替代型三种气候保护政策作了模拟情景分析。通过模拟计算得到在不实施任何气候保护政策下中国历年的CO2排放和GDP、效用等结果，然后与实施不同气候保护政策所得结果进行比较。研究发现在实行单一气候保护政策时。增汇型政策和能源替代型政策远优于生产型替代政策；而混合型政策要优于任何单一政策。     

布什政府温室气体减排政策评析

美国作为世界政治经济大国和世界第一大温室气体排放国家，其温室气体减排政策备受关注。布什政府上台后不久宣布拒绝接受《京都议定书》，并于2002年2月提出“全球气候变化计划”。布什政府实际上在以各种借口推托美国应该承担的温室气体减排国际责任，这将对以UNFCCC为基础的全球气候合作产生消极影响，并对全球气候政策提出挑战。     

特朗普“去气候化”政策对全球气候治理的影响

美国特朗普政府宣布退出《巴黎协定》是当前全球气候治理中最受舆论关注的问题,对事态发展趋势的判断和事件影响的评估是最为亟需的。本文系统分析了特朗普政府上任后推行的一系列"去气候化"政策,以及其退出《巴黎协定》的主要动因和可能形式,同时量化评估了这些内政外交的"倒退"对美国实施国家自主贡献目标以及全球气候治理格局的实质影响,并据此提出了中国应对全球气候治理新形势变化的对策和建议。研究表明,特朗普政府"美国优先"的能源政策根植于复兴制造业和加大基础设施投资的经济利益动机,随着特朗普"去气候化"进程持续发酵,诸多气候政策面临存续风险,美国实施国家自主贡献将面临严峻挑战,"倒行政策"将有可能使美国温室气体排放出现反弹。如果不考虑中、高危气候政策,美国2025年温室气体排放也仅能相对2005年下降11.0%—14.9%,距离下降26%—28%的国家自主贡献目标相去甚远。同时,特朗普政府拒绝继续履行向发展中国家提供气候资金支持的义务,将有可能导致绿色气候基金拖欠资金总额上升117%,并进一步挫伤全球低碳投资的信心。没有美国的全球气候治理3.0时代将呈现出新的复杂特征,并不可避免地造成减排、资金和领导力缺口的持续扩大,也不排除后续会出现消极的跟随者,整体进程将可能进入一个低潮周期。虽然国际社会对中国引领全球气候治理充满期待,但中国仍应审慎对待,长远谋划应对气候变化的内政外交战略,而不应将"气候举旗"看作是一蹴而就的短期策略,对各种要求中国发挥"领导作用"的说法保持清醒头脑。在今后气候谈判中,美国仍有较大可能会二次"要价",中国作为排放大国的压力依然不容小觑,中美气候关系需要再定位。     

基于CGE模型的出口退税政策调整的减排效应研究

我国的出口贸易带来的直接和间接二氧化碳(CO2)排放量占全国CO2排放总量的比重已高达47.8%(2007年)。出口退税政策是调整出口贸易的重要措施,实施出口退税的减免政策可以实现CO2的减排。基于此,本文从行业的角度出发,首先利用投入产出技术选取了制造工业、钢铁工业、化学工业和纺织工业为目标减排部门,并以政策作用在四个目标部门以实现到2020年相同减排目标作为政策情景(M-S,F-S,C-S和T-S情景),利用可计算一般均衡模型(CGE)模拟不同政策情景对我国经济和社会的影响。研究结果表明:在相同减排水平下,无论从GDP指标还是从就业指标,或者从居民福利来看,对钢铁行业实施出口退税减免的政策情景均是这几个情景中的最优选择,政策效果最差的属纺织业情景。同时,各种政策情景均会使农村居民的福利损失更大,进一步拉大城乡差距,因此政策实施时应考虑配套措施以保护农村居民福利水平。     

中美应对气候变化的政策过程比较

中国应对气候变化的政策过程具有明显的自上而下特征,美国应对气候变化的政策过程则呈现出自下而上的特点.中美之所以形成两种截然不同的气候变化政策过程,主要原因在于两国政治制度和经济基础的不同.中国集中式民主使中央政府具有绝对的政治权威,中央政府的决策能够迅速地传递到各级政府并得以实施.作为一个代议制国家,美国中央政府的决策受各种利益集团的影响较大,立法过程更为复杂和漫长.在以经济增长为基础的政治锦标赛下,中国的地方政府更关心经济增长;美国的经济已经高度发达,民众对气候变化的关心程度更高,同时,美国的地方政府在环境立法上拥有更多的自主权,这导致美国的地方政府纷纷出台各自的应对气候变化政策.美国的应对气候变化政策过程过于缓慢,但自下而上的政策形成体系使地方政府提出的减排目标更适合于自身情况,有助于实现较低的减排成本;中国应对气候变化的政策过程具有高效性,但自上而下的政策形成体系忽视了地区差别,对各地方政府造成了较大的减排压力,从而不得不付出更高的减排成本.     

大国气候博弈的中国经济与生态环境效应评估

气候变化已成为制约人类社会可持续发展的重要议题，未来拥有更多碳减排空间和先进碳技术的国家将在全球发展中处于有利地位。以美国为首的发达国家、气候变化政策的主要推动者欧盟以及以中国为代表的发展中国家等三方在全球气候变化领域的领导权与话语权争夺将更加激烈。欧美推动的碳关税政策已成为大国气候博弈的有力工具，如何在大国气候博弈中破局成为中国制定气候战略和减碳政策的重点。该研究利用全球多区域可计算一般均衡模型，以欧盟和美国对进口产品施加碳关税政策进行大国气候博弈为假设，设定八种可能情景，对中国受到的经济与生态环境影响进行评估。结果表明：(1)欧美推动的碳关税政策一定程度上造成中国国内生产总值和居民福利出现损失，同时对碳密集型商品出口有较大程度的负面影响，但对整体减排影响较为微弱。(2)欧美的碳关税政策对于欧美自身的碳减排效果并不明显，是典型的“损人不利己”行为。(3)中国出口退税政策一定程度上可以减缓碳关税政策对中国经济的负面冲击，还可以在一定程度上减少中国的碳排放。(4)中国政府需谨慎对待对进口商品施加碳关税的反制措施，其可能会带来更为严重的经济损失。建议中国采取出口退税政策主动缓解碳关税带来的...     

煤炭资源税调整测算模型及其效应研究

煤炭资源税调整是实现节能减排、推动低碳经济重要的价格调控手段,全球金融危机与我国经济回暖给煤炭资源税调整提供了有利时机.本文基于我国实际情况构建了中国能源CGE模型,测算了从价征收不同煤炭资源税税率的影响效应,结果表明:随着煤炭资源税税率的逐步提升,煤炭需求量减少幅度大干GDP减少幅度,能有效降低单位GDP煤耗.并且对CPI的影响较小.从行业影响来看,价格受影响最大的是电力、热力的生产和供应业,燃气生产和供应业;产出受影响最大的行业依次是燃气生产和供应业,电力、热力的生产和供应业,金属冶炼及压延加工业,化学工业四个行业.受影响较大的行业均是节能减排重点行业.建议政府应将目前的资源税费合并,成为资源税从价计征,提高税率,并对资源税实施专款专用,提高能源利用效率.并根据测算结果提出煤炭资源税调整与补贴投资相结合的政策建议.     

地缘政治动荡对中国能源环境的全局经济影响及其对策

乌克兰危机正深刻影响着全球能源供应形势。由于中国较高的油气对外依存度,地缘政治的不确定性对中国能源安全特别是油气的供应和经济安全有重大影响,油气进口的供应短缺会对中国社会经济及能源环境造成怎样的冲击？为此,该研究采用可计算一般均衡模型,刻画了进口供应中断和价格管制行为,从全局经济角度评估不同程度的油气进口供应短缺对中国社会经济和能源环境的影响,并设计了两套包括强化上游开发和发展可再生电力的配套措施。结果表明：(1)油气进口供应短缺会对中国GDP和城乡居民福利带来负面影响,且中断程度越强所造成的负面冲击越大。(2)从能源消费端来看,煤炭受GDP损失和能源替代的叠加影响,总体需求相对稳定;石油需求出现大幅下降;而天然气得益于国内大幅增产和价格管制,其需求降幅不大。从能源生产端来看,GDP损失使得能源需求下降,导致电力生产下降;煤炭生产受GDP损失及对能源替代的叠加作用,总体变化不大;而油气生产受价格抬高和供应中断的刺激,产量大幅上升。(3)油气进口供应中断有助于减少碳排放,同时也有较明显的协同减排效果。(4)强化上游开发和发展可再生电力均有助于减缓油气进口供应短缺对社会经济带来的负面冲击。...     

甲烷排放与应对气候变化国家战略探析

甲烷的全球变暖潜势是二氧化碳的72倍(20年水平),但其在大气中的寿命短于二氧化碳,可以作为优先减排对象。中国的甲烷排放十分突出,甲烷减排在应对气候变化国家战略中具有重要的基础性地位,然而在政策研究中,甲烷受到的关注程度远低于二氧化碳。本文基于甲烷排放研究的相关进展,首次系统性地论述了中国甲烷排放与应对气候变化国家战略之间的关系。主要结论是:甲烷排放的有效控制和减缓可以成为中国温室气体减排的重要组成部分,甲烷等温室气体的减排战略要用"系统减排"思路替代传统的"末端减排"思路;甲烷系统减排的策略和实施措施不仅需要重视主要排放部门(如煤炭开采与洗选业,农业)的直接末端减排,更需要突出强调建设活动、城市消费、资本投资和出口贸易等消费端的间接体现减排;在国际气候谈判中通过纳入甲烷排放,可以至少在五个方面丰富和支撑中国的国家立场,如从承诺"单位GDP二氧化碳减排"向承诺"单位GDP温室气体减排"转变。     

国际跨区碳市场及其能源经济影响评估

建立全球性跨区域碳市场被认为是全球气候治理的有效方式而一直备受关注。即将在2015年建成的欧盟-澳大利亚链接碳市场将成为国际跨区域碳市场的重要尝试。为分析建立多国参与的国际跨区碳市场的全球减排效果及其对各参与国的能源经济影响,本文采用表达能源经济系统相互关系的全球动态可计算一般均衡模型做出定量研究。模型将全球经济体分为20个经济部门和19个区域,并刻画有17种能源生产技术。同时为模拟全球碳市场政策,模型将碳排放权作为与化石能源消费相绑定的必要投入考虑到经济部门的各个生产与消费环节当中。在外生设置碳排放配额的同时,模型允许碳排放权像商品一样在不同区域与部门之间进行交易。考虑到全球碳市场的进展速度,本文选取2020年为研究时点,分别设计了四种情景(参考情景、独立碳市场情景、欧盟-澳大利亚链接情景以及中国-欧盟-澳大利亚链接情景)来探讨欧盟、中国、澳大利亚三国参与下的全球碳市场及其影响。研究表明,在各国2020年减排目标约束下各国碳市场的排放权价格有较大差别,澳大利亚碳价最高(32美元/t CO2),欧盟价格稍低(17.5美元/t CO2),而中国碳价最低(10美元/t CO2)。同时尽管中国的相对减排量(3%)低于欧盟(9%)与澳大利亚(18%),中国的绝对减排量也远远大于欧盟与澳大利亚两个国家。由于中国相对减排成本较低,中国加入欧盟-澳大利亚链接碳市场将促使国际碳价从22美元/t降至12美元/t,欧盟和澳大利亚分别向中国转移71%和81%的本国减排任务,同时分别获得0.03%和0.06%的福利增加。由于排放约束影响,中国工业部门的能效提升1.4%,煤炭发电量下降3.3%,而清洁能源发电量则上升3.5%。     

Energy and economic impacts of an international multi-regional carbon market

The establishment of a global multi-regional carbon market is considered to be a cost effective approach to facilitate global emission abatement and has been widely concerned.The ongoing planned linkage between the European Union’s carbon market and a new emission trading system in Australia in 2015 would be an important attempt to the practice of building up an international carbon market across different regions.To understand the abatement effect of such a global carbon market and to study its energy and economic impact on different market participants,this article adopts a global dynamic computable general equilibrium model with a detailed representation of the interactions between energy and economic systems.Our model includes 20 economic sectors and 19 regions,and describes in detail 17 energy technologies.Bundled with fossil fuel consumptions,the emission permits are considered to be essential inputs in each of the production and consumption activities in the economic system to simulate global carbon market policies.Carbon emission permits are endogenously set in the model,and can be traded between sectors and regions.Considering the current development of the global carbon market,this study takes 2020 as the study period.Four scenarios(reference scenario,independent carbon market scenario,Europe Union（EUh-Australia scenario,and China-EU-Australia scenario） are designed to evaluate the impact of the global carbon market involving China,the EU,and Australia.We find that the carbon price in the three countries varies a lot,from $32/tCO₂ in Australia,to $17.5/tCO₂ in the EU,and to $10/tCO₂ in China.Though the relative emission reduction（3%） in China is lower than that in the EU（9%） and Australia（18%）,the absolute emission reduction in China is far greater than that in the EU and Australia.When China is included in the carbon market,which already includes the EU and Australia,the prevailing global carbon price falls from $22 per ton carbon dioxide（CO₂） to $12/tCO₂,due to the relatively lower abatement cost in China.Seventy-one percent of the EU’s and eighty-one percent of Australia’s domestic reduction burden would be transferred to China,increasing 0.03%of the EU’s and 0.06%of Australia’s welfare.The emission constraint improves the energy efficiency of China’s industry sector by 1.4%,reduces coal consumption by3.3%,and increases clean energy by 3.5%.     

部分国家碳减排方案及其基本依据

二氧化碳是导致全球气候变暖最重要的温室气体．碳减排是缓解温室效应的一项重要措施．因而成为全球变化研究中的热点。在分析国际上主要利益集团中主要代表国家的碳减排方案的基础上．分析各个集团不同减排方案的基本依据。欧盟主张对灵活性机制的运用予以严格限制．强调发达国家应将主要精力放在本土的减排上．强烈反对允许以参与灵活机制来替代降低排放指标。伞形集团要求实施自由的排放权交易和灵活执行KP，主张对其应用不加任何限制．这是伞型国家的主要利益交合点。发展中国家共有的主要观点为：支持严格执行京都议定书．强调“共有但有区别的责任”的减排原则，认为发达国家应对温室气体排放负最大的责任并应率先减排。     

Climate Change Responsibility and China＇s Endeavor

The problem of climate change is a global challenge. It is closely associated with social development and human survival, and it has a significant impact to all countries on energy develop- ment, economic competitiveness, technological innovation, and way of life. In recent years, with the rapid economic development in China, there is a rumor that the rapid growth of China＇s carbon dioxide emission offset the efforts of the international community in reducing emissions, and China should bear the international responsibility corresponding to its significant role in greenhouse gas emission, which obviously are unfair and not objective. As this paper reveals, ＂China environment responsibility＂ that is the socalled ＂China environment threat＂ or theories, China has made a positive contribution to addressing the climate change in the past and China will still be the backbone on the protection of global climate in the future.     

Climate Change Responsibility and China’s Endeavor

The problem of climate change is a global challenge.It is closely associated with social development and human survival,and it has a significant impact to all countries on energy development,economic competitiveness,technological innovation,and way of life.In recent years,with the rapid economic development in China,there is a rumor that the rapid growth of China’s carbon dioxide emission offset the efforts of the international community in reducing emissions,and China should bear the international responsibility corresponding to its significant role in greenhouse gas emission,which obviously are unfair and not objective.As this paper reveals,"China environment responsibility" that is the socalled "China environment threat" or theories,China has made a positive contribution to addressing the climate change in the past and China will still be the backbone on the protection of global climate in the future.     

Actively Dealing with Climate Change and Striving to Strengthen the Capability of Sustainable Development

Either from the perspective of the finite supply capacity of global resources and energy,or from the perspective of global environment restrictive conditions,developing countries can not repeat the old development road of developed countries,either in view of the international pressure China is currently facing,or in view of China’s own resources endowment and stages of development,we must actively face such a challenge of climate change.We must recognize that the issue of climate change may be a great restraint to the present and future eco-social development,and may also be an important driving force and new opportunity to push forward the transformation of development pattern,to take a new road of industrialization and to realize sustainable development.This demands us,on the one hand,to take the Scientific Outlook of Development as the guide to make efforts to control the emission of greenhouse gases and continuously increase the capability of adapting to climatic change,and set up the overall plan to respond to climate change of our country,and on the other hand,we should unswervingly take the road of sustainable development,save energy,optimize energy structure and strengthen biological protection in slowing and adapting to climate change.     

Ecosystem service provision,management systems and climate change in Valsaín forest,central Spain

This study addresses the impact of climate change and management approach on the provision of four ecosystem services (ES) (timber production, protection against gravitational hazards, carbon sequestration and biodiversity) in Valsaín forest in central Spain. The hybrid forest patch model PICUS v1.6 was used to simulate the development of 24 representative stand types over 100 years (2010–2110) in a full factorial simulation experiment combining three management regimes [“business as usual” management (BAU) and two alternatives to BAU (AM1 and AM2)], a no-management scenario (NOM) and six climate scenarios (historic climate represented by the period 1961–1990 and five transient climate change scenarios). Simulations indicated relatively small differences as regards the impact of the different management alternatives (BAU, AM1 and AM2) on the provision of ES as well as a clear improvement in biodiversity, protection and carbon storage under the no-management regime (NOM). Although timber production indicators were the most sensitive to climate change scenarios, biodiversity-related indicators responded fastest to the management regimes applied. Indicators of protection against rockfall and landslides were affected by both management and climate change. The results indicate substantial vulnerability of ES provisioning under the more extreme climate change scenarios at low elevations (1250 m). At higher elevations, the productivity of Scots pine stands may show a moderate decrease or increase, depending on the climate change scenario.     

应对气候变化需以生态文明理念构建全球技术合作体系

气候变化是人类发展过程中遇到的最大全球性环境问题,也是最大的外部性问题。IPCC报告显示,实现本世纪末温度升高不超过2度的目标,需要全球经济和能源系统深度的低碳转型,并在本世纪下半叶达到温室气体的净零排放。应对气候变化因此面临着前所未有的技术创新与合作需求。2015年底达成的《巴黎协定》提出了落实技术开发与转让的长期愿景,主张对气候变化领域的技术创新给予政策和资金支持,使发展中国家在技术周期的早期阶段就能够获取必要的技术,从而为实现全球应对气候变化提供保障。然而,基于工业文明的传统技术创新与合作模式难以满足保护全球气候的技术需求。减缓与适应技术是气候变化挑战下全球命运共同体的公共财富。为保证其足够的供应,必须超越追求私人利益最大化的狭隘,基于生态文明理念构建全球应对气候变化的新型技术合作体系。其核心是:实现多赢的合作目标,遵循"生态人"的合作原则,体现协同的合作内容,基于互信的合作形式,鼓励多元主体的参与,促进合作成果的分享。中国作为新兴发展中大国,对应对气候变化技术国际合作有多元的利益需求。为有效落实《巴黎协定》,亟需以加速国际合作为契机,积极谋划中国应对气候变化技术对外合作的总体方略和具体行动,有针对性地制定与发达国家、其他发展中国家及欠发达国家间优势互补的合作计划,探索并引导"南-北-南"三方技术合作等新形式。     

An in-depth view of climate change:addressing climate change while making a transition on the development mode

While fossil fuels greatly contribute to human society,they pose great challenges to natural resources,the environment,and climate change.Developed countries,like the United States,formulated strategic measures to ensure their sustainable development and leading positions in the world.These measures include new green policies,development of shale gas,revitalization of nuclear power,energy independence,reindustrialization,and new low-carbon development based on a combination of Internet technology and renewable energy.Developing countries are also trying to introduce balanced strategies of poverty alleviation and sustainable development.Globally,industrial civilization is being transformed to ecological civilization and green,low-carbon development is a global trend.Addressing climate change provides new strategic factors to further this development.China should take substantial actions to realize sustainable development in a new road:China is in the critical stage of changing its development mode,so it is vital to choose an appropriate development path.This extensive development comes at the high price of consuming too much resources and scarring the environment.Mitigation and adaptation strategies for addressing climate change can help the transition of development.Based on the analysis of the development data of developed countries,the author introduces the concept of"two-type developed countries"with an understanding that not all developed countries must take the same development mode.He also holds the view that China should achieve modernization in a more energy-saving and more carbon-efficient manner compared with that of two-type developed countries.An analysis of"two competitions"that China is facing shows that changing the developing mode is urgent and China should grasp this opportunity in the next five to ten years,which is a key period for this transition.This paper discusses the low-carbon development goals and the three-step process.Low-carbon development does not necessarily restrict economic development.It,however,can expedite the transition of the development mode and this is a low-carbon and green development path.Transition of the development mode includes implementation of China’s green and low-carbon energy strategies,low-carbon society construction,development of agriculture and forestry,garbage sorting and utilization,innovation of urbanization,etc.Improvement of national infrastructure construction includes water safety,environment and climate monitoring system,intelligent energy web,basic database,etc.Addressing climate change can significantly improve the nation’s basic research level.In summary,it mitigates backward production capability,extensive development,and environmental damage while promoting technological advancement,scientific development,and ecological civilization.     

Dangerous levels of climate change for agricultural production in China

There are increasing attempts to define the measures of ‘dangerous anthropogenic inference with the climate system’ in context of Article 2 of the Framework Convention on Climate Change, due to its linkage to goals for stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations. The criteria for identifying dangerous anthropogenic interference may be characterized in terms of the consequences of climate change. In this study, we use the water stress index (WSI) and agricultural net primary production (NPP) as indictors to assess where and when there might be dangerous effects arising from the projected climate changes for Chinese agricultural production. The results showed that based on HadCM3-based climate change scenarios, the region between the North China Plain and Northeast China Plain (34.25–47.75°N, 110.25–126.25°E) would be vulnerable to the projected climate change. The analyses on inter-annual variability showed that the agricultural water resources conditions would fluctuate through the period of 2001–2080 in the region under IPCC SRES A2 scenario, with the period of 2021–2040 as critical drought period. Agricultural NPP is projected to have a general increasing trend through the period of 2001–2080; however, it could decrease during the period of 2005–2035 in the region under the IPCC SRES A2 scenario, and during the period of 2025–2035 under IPCC SRES B2 scenario. Generally, while projected climate change could bring some potentially improved conditions for Chinese agriculture, it could also bring some critical adverse changes in water resources, which would affect the overall outcome. At this stage, while we have identified certain risks and established the general shape of the damage curve expressed as a function of global mean temperature increase, more works are needed to identify specific changes which could be dangerous for food security in China. Therefore, there is a need for the development of more integrated assessment models, which include social-economic, agricultural production and food trade modules, to help identify thresholds for impacts in further studies.     

混合碳减排制度设计研究

碳减排是减缓气候变暖的必由之路,国际社会正在积极推动全球碳减排。我国已向国际社会承诺了碳减排目标,并正在大力开展相关政策的研究和制定。碳税和碳交易是多年来各国激励碳减排最主要的两大机制。这两种机制各有优缺点,它们适当的混合机制可扬长避短,创造出更优越的机制。我们认为,碳税和碳交易机制之间最大的差别在于碳税机制有较低的制度成本(包括建立者一机制所需要的人力物力的投入,以及监管成本等),在操作性上更简便;而在对市场条件和信息的变化上没有碳交易机制的灵活性强,但从另一方面,这种灵活性也恰恰是风险产生的根源之一,它增加了企业在碳排放决策方面的风险和难度;此外,碳税相对于碳交易是间接的碳减排激励机制,碳交易机制的减排效果更直接。基于这些观察,我们设计出一种混合碳减排机制,它是碳税和碳交易机制的有机结合。该混合机制包含两个部分:首先是累进制碳税制度,小企业只缴纳碳税;其次,碳交易制度,建立碳交易市场并对于大企业确定初始碳排放权,对于大企业的超排,将按照高起点的碳税税率加以惩罚。这一混合机制,既考虑了不同企业之间在碳排放权上的公平性,又考虑了机制的效率,并在保障机制效率的条件下尽可能降低企业在碳排放决策上的风险。这些正是这一混合机制的优越性所在。我们还探讨了这一混合机制在我国实施的可行性,并提出了在具体实施过程中所应注意的若干重要事项,并给出了相关的政策建议。本文的探讨可以为政府碳排放政策制定部门提供参考。