China’s Photovoltaic Development and Its Spillover Effects on Carbon Footprint at Cross-Regional Scale: Insights from the Largest Photovoltaic Industry in Northwest Arid Area
Antonio Urbina
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The theme of the article is relatively novel, and the writing framework is also relatively standardized. The following suggestions are suggested:
1、The introduction and literature review of the article are not focused enough。Further research should be conducted on the correlation between cross regional development of the photovoltaic industry and carbon emissions, and whether there are spillover effects.
2、The contribution of the article should be clearly stated.
3、What are the differences between using IOA method and DEA method in the text. Can we make a comparison.
4、Policy recommendations should not be implemented
Comments on the Quality of English Language
You can entrust a professional to further polish it
Author Response
Thank you very much for the constructive comments given by three reviewers and editors, which have improved the manuscript substantially. The responses to comments were shown as follows in point-to-point format. The attached is the certificate of language editing given by a professional editor in Editage Company, which substantially improved the expression of manuscript according to reviewers’ comments.
The theme of the article is relatively novel, and the writing framework is also relatively standardized. The following suggestions are suggested:
- The introduction and literature review of the article are not focused enough.Further research should be conducted on the correlation between cross regional development of the photovoltaic industry and carbon emissions, and whether there are spillover effects.
Response: We mentioned the spillover effects in photovoltaic industry and carbon emissions, please see second and third paragraphs in Introduction Section.
- The contribution of the article should be clearly stated.
Response: We enhanced the statements about study objectives and the novelties of this study in Introduction Section (second, third, and fourth paragraphs).
- What are the differences between using IOA method and DEA method in the text. Can we make a comparison.
Response: This study did not involve DEA, we just investigated the carbon effects of PV development through input-output analysis approach.
- Policy recommendations should not be implemented.
Response: In Discussion Section, we mentioned the roles and challenges of PV development in achieving carbon neutrality.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The article focuses on the environmental impact analysis of photovoltaic industry in North West China. The authors propose a robust Input-Output Analysis methodology to calculate local emissions (at regional level) and then regionalise the impact of PV deployment at this regional level. Both the methodological details and the results of the case study are interesting, furthermore, when China is becoming not only the main manufacturer of PV modules worldwide, but also the country where more PV capacity is installed and operated. The state of the art is good, with enough references and the conclusions are supported by the presented data.
Therefore, the article can be accepted with only minor modifications that could arise from the following comments:
1) Life Cycle Assessment studies have been broadly used to study impacts of PV technology (with approaches from cradle-to-gate or others such as cradle-to-grave including operational stage). The article could benefit with a discussion on how the author´s results are connected to more standardized LCA studies (ISO14040). Furthermore, the regional approach of the present article would nicely complement the current LCA approaches in which regionalization is poorly treated. Please provide a comment on this issue and in particular, which impact categories most commonly used in LCIA (such as ReCiPe, or ILCD) will benefit of this regionalization of the impact assessment (for example: Global Warming Potential, CO2eq emissions or others).
2) The power generation in China has been thoroughly analysed in the article; it provides a good quantification of the electricity mix and its evolution in the past decades. How this result is related with the calculation of avoided emissions by the installation of PV utility plants in China? Its time evolution will provide insightful results. Please comment on this issue.
3) Please provide more details about how the monetization of the carbon footprint has been calculated.
Author Response
Thank you very much for the constructive comments given by three reviewers and editors, which have improved the manuscript substantially. The responses to comments were shown as follows in point-to-point format. The attached is the certificate of language editing given by a professional editor in Editage Company, which substantially improved the expression of manuscript according to reviewers’ comments.
The article focuses on the environmental impact analysis of photovoltaic industry in North West China. The authors propose a robust Input-Output Analysis methodology to calculate local emissions (at regional level) and then regionalise the impact of PV deployment at this regional level. Both the methodological details and the results of the case study are interesting, furthermore, when China is becoming not only the main manufacturer of PV modules worldwide, but also the country where more PV capacity is installed and operated. The state of the art is good, with enough references and the conclusions are supported by the presented data.
Therefore, the article can be accepted with only minor modifications that could arise from the following comments:
Response: Thank you very much for your nice comments.
- Life Cycle Assessment studies have been broadly used to study impacts of PV technology (with approaches from cradle-to-gate or others such as cradle-to-grave including operational stage). The article could benefit with a discussion on how the author´s results are connected to more standardized LCA studies (ISO14040). Furthermore, the regional approach of the present article would nicely complement the current LCA approaches in which regionalization is poorly treated. Please provide a comment on this issue and in particular, which impact categories most commonly used in LCIA (such as ReCiPe, or ILCD) will benefit of this regionalization of the impact assessment (for example: Global Warming Potential, CO2eq emissions or others).
Response: This study did not involve life cycle assessment, we just investigated the carbon effects of PV development through input-output analysis approach.
- The power generation in China has been thoroughly analysed in the article; it provides a good quantification of the electricity mix and its evolution in the past decades. How this result is related with the calculation of avoided emissions by the installation of PV utility plants in China? Its time evolution will provide insightful results. Please comment on this issue.
Response: PV development reduced air pollution and carbon emission caused by traditional thermal power generation not only in Qinghai Province, but also reduced carbon emission in tele-connected regions through energy transmission.
- Please provide more details about how the monetization of the carbon footprint has been calculated.
Response: The carbon footprint is expressed by carbon amount in this study, instead of magnitude of value.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The paper evaluates the spillover impacts on economy and environment at the cross-regional scale of PV development in Qinghai Province, China. The EE-MRIO approaches is used. The PV development in Qinghai Province is used to reduce the carbon footprint in other areas. The PV industry has a positive impact on the local economy.
The paper is well written and shows some interesting findings. I have some detailed comments:
- Papers don’t have a graphical abstract. This graphical abstract cannot be understood without context. Please include this graphic at the right place in the paper.
- Line 277-278, 308 and other lines. Please round the figures to whole numbers, with 10^8 kWh/10^6 tons the “small figures” don’t matter and it is more legible
- Line 312-316 Please round the figures to xx.x %. In this case, more figures do not give more information
- Fig, 1. There is power generation on the left and right hand side of the figure. One side should be electricity generation. Is there a meaning in the province sequence? Is it possible to change the order to high to low power generation or alphabetic (A to Z)? This makes the figure more legible.
- Figure 3/5: keep the same sequence as in Figure 1
- Figure A.1: Please change the axis to xx % (without dot).
Author Response
Thank you very much for the constructive comments given by three reviewers and editors, which have improved the manuscript substantially. The responses to comments were shown as follows in point-to-point format. The attached is the certificate of language editing given by a professional editor in Editage Company, which substantially improved the expression of manuscript according to reviewers’ comments.
Reviewer # 3
The paper evaluates the spillover impacts on economy and environment at the cross-regional scale of PV development in Qinghai Province, China. The EE-MRIO approaches is used. The PV development in Qinghai Province is used to reduce the carbon footprint in other areas. The PV industry has a positive impact on the local economy.
The paper is well written and shows some interesting findings. I have some detailed comments:
- Papers don’t have a graphical abstract. This graphical abstract cannot be understood without context. Please include this graphic at the right place in the paper.
Response: We deleted the graphical abstract because the journal does not necessarily require graphical abstract.
- Line 277-278, 308 and other lines. Please round the figures to whole numbers, with 10^8 kWh/10^6 tons the “small figures” don’t matter and it is more legible
Response: We unified the number expression in the format of “xx.xx×108 kWh” and “xx.xx×106 tons”.
- Line 312-316 Please round the figures to xx.x %. In this case, more figures do not give more information
Response: We used the expression of xx%.
- Fig, 1. There is power generation on the left and right hand side of the figure. One side should be electricity generation. Is there a meaning in the province sequence? Is it possible to change the order to high to low power generation or alphabetic (A to Z)? This makes the figure more legible.
Response: The current province sequence facilitates our introduction about PV power transmission because it starts from western provinces and end with eastern provinces, which is consistent with PV power transmission from western to eastern regions.
- Figure 3/5: keep the same sequence as in Figure 1
Response: We unified the province sequence of Figs. 1, 3, and 5.
- Figure A.1: Please change the axis to xx % (without dot).
Response: We used the expression of xx%.
