China's residential electricity demand has grown rapidly over the last three decades and given the expected continued growth, demand side management (DSM) can play an important role in reducing electricity demand. By using micro-level data collected from 1450 households in 27 provinces in the first-ever China Residential Energy Consumption Survey in 2012, this study estimates the effects of three DSM measures empirically: tiered household electricity pricing, China Energy Label program, and information feedback mechanisms. We find these measures have contributed to moderating residential electricity demand growth but additional policy reform and tools are needed to increase their effectiveness and impact. Residential electricity demand is found to be price- and income- inelastic and tiered pricing alone may not be as effective in electricity conservation. The statistically significant relationship between China Energy Label efficient refrigerators - but not televisions - and lowered residential electricity consumption reflect mixed program effectiveness. Lastly, of the information feedback currently available through electricity bills, payment frequency and meters, only meter reader is estimated to be statistically significant. Important policy implications and recommendations for improving each of these three DSM measures to expand their impact on reducing residential electricity consumption are identified.

Plastics show the strongest production growth of all bulk materials over the last decade. The industry’s current growth trajectory is exponential and plastic production is expected to double or triple by 2050. The rapidly increasing production of plastics and the continued reliance on fossil fuels for production, have contributed to numerous environmental problems and health harms. As a result, plastic pollution has become an increasing threat to natural ecosystems, human health and climate. However, there is a lack of granularity on the contribution of the primary plastics specifically to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and their impact on the remaining global carbon budget needed to stay below a 1.5°C or 2°C global average temperature rise. In this report, we explore the contribution of primary plastic production to climate change disaggregated by polymer and technology. To this end, we have developed comprehensive bottom-up modeling of GHG emissions from global primary plastic production, with a special focus on polymer value chains. We have analyzed the results under various growth scenarios in the context of carbon budgets compatible with a 1.5°C global trajectory. Modeling includes the material flows of all production stages, processes and technologies used in primary plastic production value chains, including from the extraction of fossil fuels required for production to shaping the final product. We specifically focus on nine major types of fossil fuel-based plastic polymers that are produced and consumed in large quantities: three types of polyethylene (PE) – low-density (LDPE), linear low-density (LLDPE), and high-density (HDPE) – as well as polypropylene (PP); polyethylene terephthalate (PET); polyvinyl chloride (PVC); polystyrene (PS) and other key styrene-based plastics such as styrene acrylonitrile (SAN) and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), and polyurethane (PU). Together these account for about 80% of plastics production. Our estimates show that global production of primary plastics generated about 2.24 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (GtCO2e) in 2019, representing 5.3% of total global GHG emissions (excluding, agriculture and LULUCF (Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry)). Emissions from primary plastic production are generated from the combustion of fossil fuels for process heat and electricity and from other non-combustion processes. Approximately 22%, 21%, and 15% of emissions related to primary plastic production in 2019 come from all PEs together, PET, and PP, respectively. Other key plastics, i.e., PVC, PS, SAN, ABS, and PU are responsible for around 23% of global emissions from plastic production. Most (~75%) GHG emissions from primary plastic production occur from the steps prior to polymerization. Under a conservative growth scenario (2.5%/yr), GHG emissions from primary plastic production would more than double to 4.75 GtCO2e by 2050, accounting for 21-26% of the remaining global carbon budget to keep average temperature increases below 1.5°C. At 4%/yr growth, emissions from primary plastic production would increase more than three times to 6.78 GtCO2e, accounting for 25-31% of the remaining global carbon budget for limiting global warming to 1.5°C. Such detailed modeling of individual primary plastic polymers, where production value chain stages are fully taken into account, can provide a sound technically neutral and scientific foundation to inform the global plastic treaty and enable stronger coordination with other global treaties on climate change (e.g., United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Such modeling is also critical to understand the climate impacts of proposed mitigation measures under the treaty, as most of these are either polymer-specific or would have different implications per polymer.

China’s cement and steel industry accounts for approximately half of the world’s total cement and steel production. These two industries are two of the most energy-intensive and highest carbon dioxide (CO2)-emitting industries and two of the key industrial contributors to air pollution in China. For example, the cement industry is the largest source of particulate matter (PM) emissions in China, accounting for 40 percent of its industrial PM emissions and 27 percent of its total national PM emissions. The Chinese steel industry contributed to approximately 20 percent of sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions and 27 percent of PM emissions for all key manufacturing industries in China in 2013. In this study, we analyzed and projected the total PM and SO2 emissions from the Chinese cement and steel industry from 2010–2050 under three different scenarios: a Base Case scenario, an Advanced scenario, and an Advanced EOP (end-of-pipe) scenario. We used bottom-up emissions control technologies data and assumptions to project the emissions. In addition, we conducted an economic analysis to estimate the cost for PM emissions reductions in the Chinese cement industry using EOP control technologies, energy efficiency measures, and product change measures. The results of the emissions projection showed that there is not a substantial difference in PM emissions between the Base Case and Advanced scenarios, for both the cement and steel industries. This is mainly because PM emissions in the cement industry caused mainly by production process and not the fuel use. Since our forecast for the cement production in the Base Case and Advanced scenarios are not too different from each other, this results in only a slight difference in PM emissions forecast for these two scenarios. Also, we assumed a similar share and penetration rate of control technologies from 2010 up to 2050 for these two scenarios for the cement and steel industry. However, the Advanced EOP scenario showed significantly lower PM emissions for the cement industry, reaching to 1.7 million tons of PM in 2050, which is less than half of that in the other two scenarios. The Advanced EOP scenario also has the lowest SO2 emissions for the cement industry in China, reaching to 212,000 tons of SO2 in 2050, which is equal to 40 percent of the SO2 emissions in the Advanced scenario and 30 percent of the emissions in the Base Case scenario. The SO2 emission is mainly caused by fuel (coal) burning in cement kiln or steel processes. For the steel industry, the SO2 emissions of the Advanced EOP scenario are significantly lower than the other scenarios, with emissions declining to 323,000 tons in 2050, which is equal to 21 percent and 17 percent of the emissions of Advanced and Base Case scenarios in 2050, respectively. Results of the economic analysis show that for the Chinese cement industry, end-of-pipe PM control technologies have the lowest abatement cost per ton of PM reduced, followed by product change measures and energy efficiency measures, respectively. In summary, in order to meet Chinese national and regional air quality standards, best practice end-of-pipe emissions control technologies must be installed in both cement and steel industry and it must be supplemented by implementation of energy efficiency technologies and reduction of cement and steel production through structural change in industry.

Water and energy are two critical natural resources necessary for human activities and socioeconomic development. Water and energy systems are highly interdependent, and water efficiency and energy efficiency are two related indicators for the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals. It is critical to improve energy–water use efficiency to sustain socioeconomic development while reducing adverse effects on natural resources, society and the environment. By using longitudinal energy–water use data for China over the past 21 years, this paper develops a temporo-spatial study to address key issues and introduce analytical approaches needed to understand the water–energy nexus and support integrated resource planning and management to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Decomposition analysis indicates that the production effect was the dominating factor contributing the increase in the country's energy–water use, while energy–water efficiency is the major factor slowing the growth of the country's energy–water use. Changes and trends analyses show that the country's energy intensity, water intensity, and water/energy ratio significantly decreased from 1999 to 2019, but the rate of decline has slowed. The disparities of the country's provincial energy intensities, water intensities, and water/energy ratios significantly decreased with economic growth. Results suggest that improving energy–water efficiency is critical for the country to curb increasing energy and water use and achieve resource and environmental protection targets with rapid economic development. The disparities between regional energy-water efficiencies can be reduced along with economic growth, while an overheated economy can widen the disparities and result in unsustainable and inefficient utilization of resources. Government coordination, targets and policy as part of the efficiency governance system are critical for continuous energy–water efficiency improvement and directly influence the implementation and effectiveness of energy–water efficiency policy.