Dynamic Input–Output Analysis of a Carbon Emission System at the Aggregated and Disaggregated Levels: A Case Study in the Northeast Industrial District
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the urban agglomeration system 's carbon emissions and investigates the impact of different energy types on the Northeast Industrial District of China.
Overall, the paper is well organized with thoughts clearly articulated. However, there are a number of shortcomings. The methodology section is comprehensive, but the formulas are a little bit too overwhelming. Consider simplifying the formulas and just retain the most important ones and move others to SI. Several general comments and line item edits are given that should improve the clarity of the paper.
Line 151: polish the sentence ("in this paper" appears twice).
Line 234-237: factors are missing.
Line 260: what is "a" and "RCEDN"? Each individual figure should be explicable and readable independently. Reader doesn't need to go back to check "a" is "relative efficiency". RCEDN is not defined in the paper before.
Line 277: "MT" CO2 or Carbon? It would be better to have x and y axis labels and units in the figures. Avoid the overlap of numbers in the figure.
Line 303-304:what does "others" include? If "other energies" is one of the main driving factors, what is the most important "influencer" among it? Renewables? Nuclear?
Line 319-322: add abbreviations after each factor, e.g., Cumulative production-based (PBA). What are the meanings of the abbreviations in figure 5 (L-AG, L-MI)? Add some general explanations for the terms, such as "L" stands for Liaoning province?
Line 326-328: "For Heilongjiang, For Liaoning"? Is it should be "Jiling"?
Author Response
Response to Reviewer #1
|
Journal: |
Sustainability |
|
|
Ref. No.: |
Sustainability-730917 |
|
|
Title: |
Dynamic input output analysis for carbon emission system at the aggregated and disaggregated levels: A case study of Northeast Industrial District |
|
Evaluation:
This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the urban agglomeration system 's carbon emissions and investigates the impact of different energy types on the Northeast Industrial District of China.
Overall, the paper is well organized with thoughts clearly articulated. However, there are a number of shortcomings. The methodology section is comprehensive, but the formulas are a little bit too overwhelming. Consider simplifying the formulas and just retain the most important ones and move others to SI. Several general comments and line item edits are given that should improve the clarity of the paper.
RESPONSE: The authors greatly appreciate the reviewer’s overall evaluation and valuable comments. These suggestions have been taken and completely implemented by the authors. The methodology section has been shortened and the redundant part has been moved to SI. Please see the revised manuscript.
COMMENT (1): Line 151: polish the sentence ("in this paper" appears twice).
RESPONSE: We are thankful for the reviewer’s valuable comments. We have polished the sentence accordingly. We also checked the manuscript several times to avoid the similar errors.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript.
COMMENT (2): Line 234-237: factors are missing.
RESPONSE: We appreciate the reviewer’s careful comments and sorry for the error. Factors have been added in the revised manuscript.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript (from Line 274 to Line 275 on Page 9).
COMMENT (3): Line 260: what is "a" and "RCEDN"? Each individual figure should be explicable and readable independently. Reader doesn't need to go back to check "a" is "relative efficiency". RCEDN is not defined in the paper before.
RESPONSE: We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful comments. The RCEDN should be changed to RICENM in the revised manuscript. We are sorry for the error. the manuscript several times to avoid the similar errors. " " and " " refer to the relative order and the system’s robustness (the disorder part). We have added the explanation to the title of the revised figure to help readers understand the figure clearly. Moreover, a nomenclature that contains notations, Greek letters, subscripts, and acronyms has been added at the beginning of the paper to help readers clearly understand the equations and the variables.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript.
COMMENT (4): Line 277: "MT" CO2 or Carbon? It would be better to have x and y axis labels and units in the figures. Avoid the overlap of numbers in the figure.
RESPONSE: We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful comments. The "MT" is the unit of CO2. The figures have been revised accordingly. The x and y axis labels have been added in the revised manuscript. The issue of overlapping numbers in the figure has been revised. Thanks for your careful comment.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript.
COMMENT (5): Line 303-304: what does "others" include? If "other energies" is one of the main driving factors, what is the most important "influencer" among it? Renewables? Nuclear?
RESPONSE: We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful comments. "others" mainly refers to energies other than primary energy. However, due to the low emissions of clean energy and limitations of data availability, we only consider the following energy sources in our research: coke, gasoline, kerosene, diesel oil, fuel oil, LPG, heat and electricity. However, for "other energies", due to the low emissions of clean energy and limitation of data availability, we only considerer the carbon emissions from the following energy sources in our research: coke, gasoline, kerosene, diesel, fuel oil, liquefied petroleum gas, heat and electricity. We have added the explanations in the revised manuscript.
As for the contribution of "other energies", we will not make a detailed distinction. Because this research focuses on the comparison between the specific categories of primary energy (i.e. coal, crude oil and natural gas) and other energy sources. Thus, no specific research will be conducted for each category of other energy sources. In addition, the difference could be discussed in the future research.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript.
COMMENT (6): Line 319-322: add abbreviations after each factor, e.g., Cumulative production-based (PBA). What are the meanings of the abbreviations in figure 5 (L-AG, L-MI)? Add some general explanations for the terms, such as "L" stands for Liaoning province?
RESPONSE: We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful comments. A nomenclature that contains notations, Greek letters, subscripts, and acronyms has been added at the beginning of the paper to help readers clearly understand the equations and the variables. Moreover, the general explanations for the terms have been added in the revised figures.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript (from Line 30 on Page 2 to Line 38 on Page 3).
COMMENT (7): Line 326-328: "For Heilongjiang, For Liaoning"? Is it should be "Jiling"?
RESPONSE: We are grateful for the reviewer's valuable comment. We have revised the results accordingly. The "Liaoning" has been revised to "Jiling".
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript (from Line 365 on Page 13).
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The purpose of this paper is to develop an integrated carbon emission network model to explore the impact of four representative energy groups on the Northeast Industrial District (NID), China, based on an input-output framework for carbon emission system at the aggregated and disaggregated levels. This is an interesting paper. In my opinion, this paper can be accepted for publication after the following revisions have been made:
1.Suggest rewriting the “Abstract” to briefly describe the motives, purposes, research methods, important results, limitations and future research directions of this research.
2. Suggest enhancing the description of the motive of this research in the “Introduction” section,
3.Suggest adding the “Literature review” section to review the related papers in the field and explain what contribution of this research can add to the field. Some material of literature review is put in the “Introduction” section in the current manuscript.
4.Suggest using a table to describe the essentials and comparisons among the related researches mentioned in the “Literature Review” section.
5. Suggest adding the “Conclusion” section to give the summary and concluding remarks of this research.
6.Suggest enhancing the description of the limitations and the future research directions of this research in the “Conclusion” section.
7. Suggest citing more related papers published in this journal “sustainability” to link this paper to the material of the journal “sustainability” (only one now).
Author Response
Response to Reviewer #2
|
Journal: |
Sustainability |
|
|
Ref. No.: |
Sustainability-730917 |
|
|
Title: |
Dynamic input output analysis for carbon emission system at the aggregated and disaggregated levels: A case study of Northeast Industrial District |
|
Evaluation:
The purpose of this paper is to develop an integrated carbon emission network model to explore the impact of four representative energy groups on the Northeast Industrial District (NID), China, based on an input-output framework for carbon emission system at the aggregated and disaggregated levels. This is an interesting paper. In my opinion, this paper can be accepted for publication after the following revisions have been made:
RESPONSE: The authors greatly appreciate the reviewer’s overall evaluation and valuable comments. These suggestions have been taken and completely implemented by the authors. Please see the revised manuscript.
COMMENT (1): Suggest rewriting the “Abstract” to briefly describe the motives, purposes, research methods, important results, limitations and future research directions of this research.
RESPONSE: We are thankful for the reviewer’s valuable comments. We have rewritten the “abstract” accordingly. In detail, the revised “abstract” could be summarized as follows:
- the motives:
Research on carbon emissions of complex interactive activities in urban agglomerations is one of the hotspots of global climate change research. A comprehensive analysis of the urban agglomeration system 's carbon emissions is essential to reveal reduction ways and support sustainable development.
- the purposes:
The objective of this research is to develop an integrated carbon emission network model to explore the impact of different energy types on the Northeast Industrial District (NID), China.
- research methods:
Based on the input-output framework, four representative energy groups are considered, which fills a gap of limited research considering the impact of energy classification on carbon emission system. Specifically, at the aggregated sector-level, this research quantified the relative contributions of socio-economic factors to carbon emission changes using structural decomposition analysis and examined the system efficiency and redundancy through robustness analysis. At the disaggregated level, the research investigated carbon emissions of sectors from production-based (direct emissions), consumption-based (upstream emissions driven by final consumption), and income-based (downstream emissions enabled by primary inputs) viewpoints. Moreover, emissions from specific categories of final demand and primary input were quantified.
- important results:
It is found that the increase of final demand level will proceed to push up carbon emissions of NID. Special attention should be paid to natural gas energy utilization efficiency. Changing production structure contributes to reducing emissions. Moreover, there may be great potential to change final demand structure for carbon emissions reductions. As for the system's long-term sustainability, the carbon emissions system has high redundancy and low efficiency, illustrating that there are many emission pathways within the system. In addition, the use of crude oil significantly increases system redundancy and inhibit system efficiency.
- limitations:
However, the major limitation of the model is that the long-term changes of the system being not considered.
- future research directions of this research:
Moreover, emission reduction simulations considering the actual policies could be added in the future.
This suggestion is of great help to the author's future scientific research paper. These suggestions have been implemented by the authors.
CHANGES: Please see the revised Abstract part.
COMMENT (2): Suggest enhancing the description of the motive of this research in the “Introduction” section,
RESPONSE: We are grateful for the reviewer's valuable comment. The description of the motive of this research has been enhanced in the revised manuscript. In detail, the motive of the research could be summarized as follows:
- Most studies related to urban agglomeration systems have analyzed the carbon emissions of various sectors embodied in trade, while analysis of driving factors of carbon emissions in urban agglomerations at the aggregated sector-level has received not enough attention.
- In most urban regions, particularly those with greater carbon emissions, the formulation of emission reduction policies lacked comprehensive assessment at aggregated and disaggregated sector-level, and the reduction effect was much weaker.
- Little research has considered the differences in carbon emissions caused by different types of energy use.
- Few studies have conducted in-depth studies on the Northeast Industrial District (NID) urban agglomeration with heavy industrial structure and serious carbon emission problems.
Hence, this paper targets on the systematic research of carbon emissions in urban agglomerations. To do so, this paper develops an integrated carbon emission network model for NID to explore the relative contributions of socio-economic factors to carbon emission changes at the aggregated sector-level, and assess production-based, consumption-based, and income-based carbon emissions of sectors at the disaggregated sector-level.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript.
COMMENT (3): Suggest adding the “Literature review” section to review the related papers in the field and explain what contribution of this research can add to the field. Some material of literature review is put in the “Introduction” section in the current manuscript.
RESPONSE: We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful comments. These suggestions have been implemented by the authors. A new section “Literature review” has been added in the revised manuscript. We have explained how this research can contribute to the field.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript (from Line 95 on Page 4 to Line 133 on Page 5).
COMMENT (4): Suggest using a table to describe the essentials and comparisons among the related researches mentioned in the “Literature Review” section.
RESPONSE: We are grateful for the reviewer's valuable comment. These suggestions have been implemented by the authors. We have added a table to the “Literature Review” section to describe the essentials and comparisons among the related methods.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript (from Line 131 to Line 132 on Page 5).
COMMENT (5): Suggest adding the “Conclusion” section to give the summary and concluding remarks of this research.
RESPONSE: We are thankful for the reviewer’s valuable comments. The suggestion has been implemented by the authors. We have added a "conclusion" section in the revised manuscript to highlight the important findings. The "conclusion" section gives the summary and concluding remarks of this research. In detail,
- Some important conclusions of the NID area from the perspectives of aggregated and disaggregated sector levels have been summarized.
- The significant difference between our research and the previous research has been highlighted.
- Applicability of the model has been emphasized.
- The limitations and future directions have been summarized.
Thanks for your comment again.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript (from Line 496 to Line 523 on Page 17).
COMMENT (6): Suggest enhancing the description of the limitations and the future research directions of this research in the “Conclusion” section.
RESPONSE: We appreciate the reviewer’s valuable comments. The description of the limitations and the future research directions of this research has been added in the “Conclusion” section in the revised manuscript. In detail, the limitations could be summarized as follows:
First, longer-term changes of the system should be considered, while only three-year changes of the system are analyzed due to the timeliness of input-output analysis. Second, emission reduction simulation considering the actual policies is of great necessity to reflect the rationality of policy makings. Third, the cost of emission reduction policies is of great values on reflecting the economic impacts of different policies.
The future research directions of this research could be summarized as follows:
First, some methods that are not based on input-output framework could be considered, such as IDA. Second, the simulations could be considered from three perspective in the future, and the response of the system could be explored through different degrees of interference. Third, future research should consider how to combine regional emissions and emission reduction costs to achieve co-benefits of emission reduction and economy.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript (from Line 496 to Line 523 on Page 17).
COMMENT (7): Suggest citing more related papers published in this journal “sustainability” to link this paper to the material of the journal “sustainability” (only one now).
RESPONSE: We are thankful for the reviewer's valuable comment. The revised manuscript cites more papers from "sustainability" journals to confirm that the research is closely related to the journal's publication. Thanks for your comment again.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript titled: Dynamic input output analysis for carbon emission system at the aggregated and disaggregated levels: A case study of Northeast Industrial District by H. Zang et al. describes an integrated carbon emission network model which was applied to Northeast Industrial District (NID) in China.
Paper is quite interesting, however, some conclusions presented in the discussion section are trivial. Additionally, the manuscript requires good explanation to the abbreviations used in text. Perhaps addition of the glossary should be taken into the consideration. Otherwise, some parts of this paper are really very hard to understand.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer #3
|
Journal: |
Sustainability |
|
|
Ref. No.: |
Sustainability-730917 |
|
|
Title: |
Dynamic input output analysis for carbon emission system at the aggregated and disaggregated levels: A case study of Northeast Industrial District |
|
Evaluation:
The manuscript titled: Dynamic input output analysis for carbon emission system at the aggregated and disaggregated levels: A case study of Northeast Industrial District by H. Zang et al. describes an integrated carbon emission network model which was applied to Northeast Industrial District (NID) in China.
RESPONSE: The authors greatly appreciate the reviewer’s overall evaluation and valuable comments. These suggestions have been taken and completely implemented by the authors. Please see the revised manuscript.
COMMENT (1): Paper is quite interesting, however, some conclusions presented in the discussion section are trivial. Additionally, the manuscript requires good explanation to the abbreviations used in text. Perhaps addition of the glossary should be taken into the consideration. Otherwise, some parts of this paper are really very hard to understand.
RESPONSE: We are thankful for the reviewer’s valuable comments. These suggestions have been implemented by the authors.
We have added a "conclusion" section in the revised manuscript to highlight the important findings. The "conclusion" section gives the summary and concluding remarks of this research. In detail,
- Some important conclusions of the NID area from the perspectives of aggregated and disaggregated sector levels have been summarized.
- The significant difference between our research and the previous research has been highlighted.
- Applicability of the model has been emphasized.
- The limitations and future directions have been summarized.
Moreover, a nomenclature that contains notations, Greek letters, subscripts, and acronyms has been added at the beginning of the paper to help readers clearly understand the equations and the variables.
Thanks for your comments.
CHANGES: Please see the revised manuscript (from Line 496 to Line 523 on Page 17 and from Line 30 on Page 2 to Line 38 on Page 3).
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
