首页|期刊导航|气候变化研究进展|中国碳中和目标下不同减排路径的能源转型差异研究

中国碳中和目标下不同减排路径的能源转型差异研究OA

Divergent energy transition pathways under varied carbon emission reduction trajectories for China's carbon neutrality goal

中文摘要英文摘要

全球温控目标要求将人为CO2排放约束在有限的碳预算范围内.不同的碳预算分配方案将显著影响国家未来潜在的排放限制,同时,减排路径的差异也将进一步影响能源转型进程.为综合评估全球1.5℃与2℃温控目标下中国采取不同碳中和路径决策对能源转型的差异化影响,本研究基于不同碳预算分配方案与碳中和路径方案组合形成24种碳中和能源转型情景,并基于全球变化评估模型(GCAM)从一次能源消费、终端能源电气化、电力结构与碳价格变化等多方面探讨了不同路径下的能源转型综合影响.结果表明,在1.5℃目标下,中国未来碳预算仅为1034亿~1413亿t,而2℃情景下,碳预算将提升至2397亿~3294亿t;采取不同的减排路径将对我国的能源转型造成显著差异,尤其在1.5℃目标下,采取"先慢后快"的减排路径将显著增加对碳移除技术的依赖;积极稳妥推进碳达峰与碳中和("先快后慢"和"中间路径")将有效避免潜在的社会成本上升.在1.5℃目标下,采取"先慢后快"减排路径的2060年碳价格均值较积极降碳的路径将提高56%~89%,在2℃目标下将提高9%~21%.中国提出的2035年非化石能源消费占比超过30%的新国家自主贡献(NDC)目标超过大多数2℃目标要求,其中"先快后慢"和"中间路径"情景中2035年的非化石能源消费更接近中国新NDC目标.

Global temperature control goals require constraining anthropogenic carbon emissions within a limited carbon budget,where different allocation schemes significantly influence national emission constraints and varying pathway strategies profoundly impact energy transition processes.China's carbon neutrality commitment necessitates unprecedented energy system transformation within three decades,making comprehensive assessment of pathway impacts under global carbon budgets critically important.This study developed 24 carbon-neutral energy transition scenarios combining carbon budget allocation schemes with pathway strategies,utilizing the Global Change Analysis Model(GCAM)to analyze impacts on primary energy consumption,end-use electrification,power structure transformation,and carbon pricing.Results demonstrate that under 1.5 ℃target,China's carbon budget remains severely constrained at 103.4-141.3 Gt CO2,while 2 ℃ target permits larger budget of 239.7-329.4 Gt CO2,with equity-based principles imposing more stringent constraints than grandfathering principles due to historical emission considerations.The choice of emission reduction pathways will profoundly shape the trajectory of China's energy transition.Under 1.5℃ target,an emission reduction strategy characterized by initial delay followed by accelerated action("delayed-action")would substantially increase reliance on CO2 removal technologies.Conversely,"rapid-then-slow"and"intermediate pathways"will effectively avoid potential increases in social costs.Specifically,within the 1.5 ℃ target,the average carbon price by 2060 under the"delayed-action"pathway is projected to be 56%to 89%higher than under the"rapid-then-slow"and"intermediate pathways".This persists at 9%-21%even under 2 ℃ target.Furthermore,the new Nationally Determined Contribution(NDC)target for China to exceed 30%non-fossil energy consumption by 2035 will surpass most 2℃ target scenarios.Among these,the non-fossil energy consumption in the"rapid-then-slow"and"intermediate pathway"scenarios for 2035 is closer to China's new NDC target.

王家兴;何小玉;王雨涵;李彦;鲁玺;贺克斌

清华大学环境学院,北京 100084||环境模拟与污染控制国家重点联合实验室,北京 100084同济大学环境科学与工程学院,上海 200092清华大学环境学院,北京 100084||环境模拟与污染控制国家重点联合实验室,北京 100084同济大学环境科学与工程学院,上海 200092清华大学环境学院,北京 100084||环境模拟与污染控制国家重点联合实验室,北京 100084||清华大学碳中和研究院,北京 100084清华大学环境学院,北京 100084||环境模拟与污染控制国家重点联合实验室,北京 100084||清华大学碳中和研究院,北京 100084

碳预算能源转型碳中和减排路径全球变化评估模型(GCAM)

Carbon budgetEnergy transitionCarbon neutralityCarbon emission reduction pathwaysGlobal Change Analysis Model(GCAM)

《气候变化研究进展》 2026 (2)

213-223,11

国家自然科学基金项目(72025401,72140003,72104117,72243007)

10.12006/j.issn.1673-1719.2025.276

评论