You are on page 1of 31

Energy

Manuscript Draft

Manuscript Number: EGY-D-18-00733

Title: Prospective on energy related carbon emission peak integrating


optimized intelligent algorithm with dry process technique application
for China's cement industry

Article Type: Full length article

Keywords: peak carbon emissions; particle swarm optimization; back


propagation neural network; scenario analysis; cement industry; the
second generation dry cement technology

Abstract: Global climate change is a significant environmental problem, a


major cause of climate change is that the excess carbon emissions.
Therefore, the control of carbon emissions is of vital importance to the
improvement of climate. Based on data from 1996 to 2015, this paper
forecasts the carbon emissions and peak value of China's cement industry
for 2018-2040 years. In this paper, on the basis of the second generation
of new cement dry technology system, 44 kinds of scenarios are put
forward. Then the combination of back propagation (BP) neural network and
improved particle swarm optimization algorithm (IPSO) is used to compute
the carbon emissions and the peak value of carbon emissions under various
scenarios. Finally, the influence of different technologies on the peak
carbon emissions is compared. The results indicate that, the carbon
emissions in China's cement industry will peak earlier than 2030.
Moreover, some technical combinations can advance the peak carbon
emissions' time of the cement industry earlier. From the above results,
relevant policy recommendations are proposed in this paper.
*Manuscript
Click here to view linked References

Prospective on energy related carbon emission peak integrating optimized


intelligent algorithm with dry process technique application for China’s
cement industry
Wei Li*, Shubin Gao
School of Economics and Management, North China Electric Power University, No. 619 Yonghua Street,

Baoding, Hebei 071003, China

Beijing Key Laboratory of New Energy and Low-Carbon Development (North China Electric Power

University), Changping Beijing, 102206

* Correspondence: ncepulw@126.com; Tel.: +86-1871-328-6966

Abstract
Global climate change is a significant environmental problem, a major cause of climate change is that the excess carbon

emissions. Therefore, the control of carbon emissions is of vital importance to the improvement of climate. Based on data from

1996 to 2015, this paper forecasts the carbon emissions and peak value of China's cement industry for 2018-2040 years. In this

paper, on the basis of the second generation of new cement dry technology system, 44 kinds of scenarios are put forward. Then

the combination of back propagation (BP) neural network and improved particle swarm optimization algorithm (IPSO) is used to

compute the carbon emissions and the peak value of carbon emissions under various scenarios. Finally, the influence of different

technologies on the peak carbon emissions is compared. The results indicate that, the carbon emissions in China's cement

industry will peak earlier than 2030. Moreover, some technical combinations can advance the peak carbon emissions’ time of the

cement industry earlier. From the above results, relevant policy recommendations are proposed in this paper.

Keywords: peak carbon emissions ; particle swarm optimization;back propagation neural network; scenario analysis; cement
industry; the second generation dry cement technology

1 introduction
Since the industrial revolution in the last century, fossil fuels have been fully exploited and utilized. Excess carbon dioxide

( CO2 ) emissions have caused a series of environmental problems such as global warming, extreme weather and environmental

degradation. As a major greenhouse gas, the contribution rate of CO2 is 63% [1]. Therefore, controlling carbon emissions plays

an important role in solving the problem of climate change.

The core content of Paris Climate Conference 2015 was controlling carbon emissions. At the meeting, Paris Climate

Agreement was adopted by196 parties. The state parties will make arrangements for the global response to climate change after

2020.After the Paris Climate Change Conference, in order to curb the growth of carbon dioxide emissions, the goal of global

average temperature raising less than 2℃ was set, which was generally considered as a global challenge [2].

The contradiction between the carrying capacity of the ecological environment and economic growth, has become

increasingly remarkable, with the rapid growth of Chinese economy[3]. Global carbon project website shows that the total

amount of global carbon dioxide emissions has reached 362 million tons in 2015, of which China accounted for over

28.77%,more than the sum of the United States and the European Union[4]. As a result of rapid economic growth, China has

become the largest carbon dioxide emitter [5].As a big carbon-emitting country, China adopted a series of positive measures.

On June 30,2015, Intended Nationally Determined Contributions(INDC) was released by Chinese government, which set

out the action goal coping with climate change in 2030,and determined that the carbon intensity in 2030 will descend by 60%—
65%. In order to achieve the reduction objective and accelerate the procedure of the resource-saving and environment-friendly

society, the Chinese government has been unable to adapt to the new perspective of solving environmental problems, so as to

manage resources in an adaptive and multilateral way[6]. In addition, Chinese government promulgated

"the 13th Five-Year Plan on Controlling Greenhouse Gas Emission", the primary objective is that by 2020, the carbon dioxide

emissions per unit GDP will decline by 18% over the previous year and the total amount of carbon dioxide emissions will be

effectively controlled [7].

Building materials industries, mainly including cement, gypsum, brick, stone, glass, ceramics, and refractory materials, are

the typical carbon-intensive industries, as well as the major sources of carbon emissions in many countries [8-10]. Among them,

cement is a crucial building material, it plays an important role in Chinese economic development, but cement production has

also caused critical environmental pollution in China. China is the largest cement production and consumption country, the

cement production accounts for over 39% of the world cement production [11].The relevant data demonstrate that the dust

pollution of the backward cement plant accounts for nearly 6-8% of the total carbon emissions [12].

From 1990 to 2011, the carbon emissions of cement production have grown to 11.3% from less than 5% of Chinese total

carbon emissions [13]. In 2011, the carbon emissions from Chinese cement industry accounted for 60.6% of the global cement

carbon emissions [14]. The related contents in "China cement production standard specification" [15] indicate that the goal of

Chinese cement industry is to save energy, reduce carbon emissions, develop advanced production technology and technical

equipment, and promote cleaner production. In order to solve the overcapacity, the rapid growth of carbon emissions and other

critical problems in the cement industry, China Cement Association issued the "cement industry planning in 13th five-Year",

which formulated clear targets for reducing carbon emissions and cutting excessive industrial capacity of cement industry: by

2020, cement clinker capacity is reduced by nearly 4 million tons, and 60% of the production lines use the second generation dry

cement technology[16].The study of carbon emissions in China's cement industry has an important impact on the improvement

of climate change and carbon emissions reduction.

In view of the importance of energy conservation and emission reduction in China, many scholars have carried out different

degrees of research on carbon emissions. As an example, on the 2013, CAI [17] collected detailed information of 1574 domestic

cement plants, and evaluated the carbon emissions of cement industry, the emissions of state-owned and large enterprises

accounted for 59.4% and 61.9%, the average emissions of China’s cement enterprises was 35 kg CO2 / T cl . Cui and Liu [18]
worked out the carbon emission coefficient of cement production process, the results demonstrated that the carbon dioxide

emissions from raw materials calcined, coal and electricity individually made up 59%, 26% and 12% of the total amount.

ZHANG quantitatively evaluated the potential and avoidable cost of carbon dioxide emission of China cement industry through

the application of emission reduction technology. The conclusion was that the industry's carbon emissions reduction could be

achieved by improving energy efficiency and alternative energy fuel, and the replacement of clinker would provide a significant

cost advantage. The analysis was mainly based on strong technical deployment, but these scenarios were briefly simple and have

no contact with specific policy measures [19]. The energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions of the cement industry

during the period of 2010 to 2050 were simulated by Li et al.[20]. It concluded that the carbon emissions reduction of China's

cement industry would mainly depend on the recent improvement of energy efficiency. On the other hand, the use of CCUS and

alternative fuels will be crucial in the long run. Shen [21] examined the impact and the development potential of different

policies from the power, environment, clean energy and many other aspects.

Furthermore, many scholars have designed models to analyze the carbon emissions in different industries. For example,

Kumar [22] devised different energy scenarios by LEAP model. Under the energy scenarios, carbon dioxide emissions were
estimated by the lowest cost, and then discuss the application of renewable energy in India future power supply system. The

results suggested that under the technology scenario, in 2050, the electricity generation of renewable energy would accounted for

30%, and the carbon emissions would decline by 74%. Azam et al. [23] used long-term energy plan (LEAP) model, on basis

scenario, bio diesel vehicles, natural gas vehicle (NGV) and hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) and other scenarios,to estimate the

energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions of the road transport in Malaysia from 2012 to 2040. Then it was concluded

that the energy consumption and the carbon emissions reduction of road traffic in NGV are the most effective.

The LEAP model is also applied to the analysis of carbon emissions in the domestic cement industry. Cai et al. [24] took the

cement industry as one of the targets, were the one of earlier researchers to quantitatively estimate CO2 mitigation potential in

China. 12 techniques were used in scenario calculation, and the use of long-term energy planning system (LEAP) model states

that two kinds of technology (the ‘conversion to multi-stage pre-heater kiln’ and ‘combustion system improvement’ to 2020)

suggested the highest potential in emission reduction. Because of the lack of sufficient information, the selection of technology

adoption rate was not reasonable enough. Besides, the analysis was only based on the administrative and regulatory approaches,

and did not take the impact of market means into account. In addition to the LEAP model, many studies have been analyzed and

studied for scenarios through the design of different technologies. For instance, Wang et al. [25] studied the main driver of

CO2 emission growth by the logarithmic mean Divisia index (LMDI). Research on carbon emissions in China's cement
industry were carried out by Lin et al. [26]. Results indicated that production activity effect and labor productivity effect are the

main driving factors. LIN and OUYANG [27] used the LMDI method to test the driving factors for the emission growth of

China's non-metallic mineral products industry and explored the potential of the non-metallic mineral industry to reduce the

emission reduction potential. The results manifested that the adjustment of energy structure, the adjustment of industrial structure

and the progress of technology may lead to the decrease of carbon intensity. SONG et al. [21] selected 6 factors, such as

population, urbanization rate and GDP per capita as independent variables. They build BP prediction model of carbon emissions

by using BP neural network, and predicted emissions in China from 2010 to 2015. The Asia Pacific integrated model (AIM) was

exploited by WEN et al. [28], who assessed the latent capacity of carbon emission reduction in China's cement industry from

2010 to 2020. Xu et al. [29] used energy saving supply curve (ECSC) model to assess the impact of potential technological

improvements on China. Wang et al. [30] had made clear that technology promotion and industrial structure adjustment are the

main measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the industry.

It can be seen from the above study that the domestic and foreign scholars chiefly study the relationship between the macro

impact of cement industry carbon emissions and urbanization, population size, GDP and other factors, and the study of energy

consumption is less. In research method, the LEAP model is mainly dependent on expert judgment, with strong subjectivity. It is

easier to produce multiple linear problems between different factors in STIRPAT model. In this paper, the improved particle

swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm and the back propagation (BP) neural network are used to predict the carbon emissions and

the peak of carbon emissions in China's cement industry.

BP neural network is known as multilayer feed forward neural network that demonstrates better performance in

classification and prediction of nonlinear system. It suggests that BP neural network has great potential in predicting carbon

emissions [31]. Although the traditional BP network is a useful step in the development of artificial neural network, but because

of its outdated algorithm, BP neural network has the following defects: (1) the speed of learning convergence is too slow, and the

number of learning times is often a lot. Moreover, the learning of complex systems cannot converge at times, (2) it cannot be

guaranteed to converge to the global minimum point. In the process of learning, the local minimum point often leads to the stop

learning of the network, (3) the result of learning is not stable enough. When the new learning model is added, it must be
provided with the original learning model to relearn the network. This paper introduces the particle swarm optimization

algorithm and improved BP neural network (IPSO-BP) model of carbon emissions prediction method to solve the above

problems. Firstly, the particle swarm optimization algorithm is optimized by the self-selection mutation operator and the

nonlinear inertia weight coefficient. Secondly, this paper combines the improved PSO with BP neural network. By modifying the

weights of the neural network,the problem that the traditional BP neural network has too slow convergence speed, low precision

and easy to fall into the local optimal solution can be solved.

In this paper, the factors affecting the carbon dioxide emissions of the cement industry are selected. According to the 4 new

technologies of the second generation dry cement technology in "the 13th Five-Year Plan on cement industry"[7], 15 different

technology scenarios and 28 sensitivity analysis scenarios were set up. This paper forecasts the carbon emissions and compares

the times to peak of carbon emissions under different scenarios, and then determines that what kind of technology is more

effective in reducing carbon emissions, while forecasting the time to peak of cement industry emissions.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows: the second part selects the factors that affect the carbon emissions according

to the characteristics of the cement industry, and combines improved PSO and BP neural network. The third section forecasts the

carbon emissions of the cement industry from 2018 to 2040 and compares the forecast results under different scenarios.

According to the comparison results, the fourth part puts forward some suggestions for improvement.

2 Data description and model design


2.1Analysis on the influence factors of carbon emissions in cement industry
According to the relevant regulations of China on the industry, the cement industry is the major part of the building

materials, and its industry code is as follows: the category is C (Manufacturing); the large category is 30 (non-metallic mineral

products industry); the middle class is 301 (gypsum, cement products and similar products); the small class is 3011 (cement

manufacturing).

According to the GHG emissions inventory [32], the carbon emissions of the cement industry can be expressed as:

ECO2  E flame  Eprocess  Eelectricity and heat (1)

The total carbon emissions of cement enterprises consist of three parts: fuel combustion emissions, industrial production

process emissions and consumption of electricity and heat.

First of all, the fuel combustion emissions are mainly composed of combustion activities level (AD) and emission factors by

coal, coke, oil and natural gas and other fossil fuel, and the principal influencing factor is the consumption of fossil fuel. In view

of the current industrial situation in China, the use of new energy sources has already started, but the energy consumption is still

dominated by coal consumption. Meanwhile,the impact of coal consumption on carbon emissions in the industry is much greater

than other energy consumption. The coal consumption ( X 1 ) of variable industries is used to measure the impact of fuel

combustion on carbon emissions. The low calorific value and emission factor of coal are known [33].

Secondly, industrial production process emissions are composed of the production of cement clinker, the amount of raw

cement, the percentage of carbon in raw materials, and so on. In the process of cement production, the calcinations of materials

will cause the decomposition of the original carbon materials (such as CaO , etc.), which affects the carbon emissions. Because

of the variety of cement and different mineral content in different varieties, the effect of material calcinations on the carbon

emissions is expressed by the cement clinkers production, in this paper, which is expressed by( X 2 ).

Finally, the consumption of electricity and heat is indirect emission. This part of carbon emissions is composed of electricity
consumption, heat consumption and emission factors. The net heat energy and electricity generated in the cement production

process will also be transformed into carbon dioxide. As the major part of the cement production process affecting carbon

emissions, this paper uses ( X 3 ) to express the impact of industrial heat consumption on carbon emissions and uses ( X 4 ) to

indicate the impact of industrial electricity consumption on carbon emissions.


2.2 Sample data source
This paper collects original data of the coal industry consumption, cement production, industrial heat consumption and

power consumption from 1996 to 2015, all the data were derived from "Statistical yearbook of China" [37], “China energy

Statistical yearbook” [38] (except for Hong Kong and Macao, Tibet area) and “Industry Carbon Emissions Data Statistics” [39].

As shown in Table 1:

Table 1 Part of the original data of China Statistical Yearbook 2016

Coal consumption Cement production (ten Heat consumption (ten Power consumption
Year
(ten thousand tons) thousand tons) billion KJ ) (billion KWH)

1996 13588.50 49118.90 157.62 592.51

1997 12792.07 51173.80 207.13 608.08

1998 11663.08 53600.00 160.90 649.10

1999 11005.85 57300.00 132.65 660.71

2000 11189.51 59700.00 135.64 734.18

2001 9890.44 66103.99 156.94 793.05

2002 8897.88 72500.00 181.67 879.64

2003 11259.01 86208.11 215.93 1030.93

2004 16304.84 96681.99 417.58 1209.25

2005 20211.50 106884.79 465.43 1416.13

2006 20708.53 123676.48 494.10 1673.75

2007 20416.79 136117.25 592.92 1884.30

2008 23049.05 142355.73 494.10 1959.68

2009 26565.26 164397.78 641.74 2126.16

2010 30844.00 188191.17 661.74 2448.48

2011 33370.00 209925.86 622.57 2917.93

2012 32205.00 220984.08 687.75 2951.26

2013 31633.00 241923.89 779.36 3148.49

2014 33015.00 249207.08 814.12 3324.42

2015 31195.00 235918.83 903.67 3105.42

2.3 BP neural network setup


2.3.1Structure setting of BP neural network
This paper uses BP neural network to forecast carbon emissions of future industry. BP neural network is the most widely

used artificial neural network model in recent years. Its feed-forward neural network can be divided into input layer, hidden layer

and output layer. Each layer only receives information from the previous layer, and the input information is transmitted one by
one,thus, it forms a multilayer feed forward neural network. By comparing the actual output and expected output, the BP neural

network enters the backward operation process when its error exceeds the required precision, and the error signal is sent back to

the original forward operation path. At the same time, the connection weights in the hidden layer are modified, and the expected

error tends to be minimized by the continuous feed forward adjustment of the output layer data.

This paper intends to adopt the idea of forecasting the trend of neural network. A single hidden layer neural network with

four input nodes, one output node and eleven hidden layer nodes is established. Through training several times, the connection

weights between each neuron are adjusted to make the network more approximate to the actual value. Finally, the trained neural

network is applied to predict the carbon emissions data of the future cement industry. As shown in Figure1:

4 nodes of the input layer 11 nodes in the hidden layer 1nodes of the output layer

Connection weight

Output variable
Input

Figure 1 BP neural network model structure

In this paper, the data of coal consumption, cement production, electricity emission, heat consumption and cement industry

carbon emissions from 1996 to 2015 were taken as the overall samples. The data in the first 15 years were taken as training

samples, and the data in the last 5 years were taken as test samples. In this model, the relationship of output variable y t and the

input variable x1 , x 2 ,… x n can be expressed in the following form:

,xn,w)   t
yt  f ( x1,x2, (2)

Where in, w is the parameter of BP neural network model, function f is determined by the network structure and the
weight parameters.

2.3.2 Hidden layer setting


The hidden layer includes neurons that connected to all the nodes in the input layer and the output layer. In this paper, the

number of neurons in the hidden layer is determined by the trial and error method. According to the comparison of the error, the

number of the neurons in the hidden layer is 11. There is a weight for each connection between two neurons. The neuron

summarizes all the signals it receives; each signal is multiplied by the relevant weights on the connection, and the sum of the

weights is processed by a certain activation function. The training data are obtained by using the input layer - hidden layer, the

hidden layer - output layer and the error feed forward to adjust the weights of the neural network.

This paper sets up” tansig ”as the neuron transfer function in the hidden layer of the model. The output layer neuron

transfer function is” log sig ”, and the training function is conjugate gradient algorithm. The implicit layer of the model is
selected as the function” Sigmoid ”as an implicit layer incentive function. The following is as follows:

1
g ( x)  (3)
1  ex

2.3.3 Neural network training


The initial weights of BP neural network are often randomly selected through algorithm, which can lead to the error

between the output and the target (the actual). The BP algorithm minimizes errors by spreading errors back to the network. The

weights of each connection between the neurons are changed according to the size of the error, and the training is stopped when

the root mean square error (RMSE) reaches the acceptable value.

In this paper, the conjugate gradient algorithm is selected as the training algorithm. Comparing with the traditional gradient

descent algorithm, the conjugate gradient algorithm can quickly make the objective function converge to the minimum and gets

the accurate network weights and thresholds. Meanwhile,the running speed of the conjugate gradient algorithm is faster than the

gradient descent algorithm. The training process of neural network is to send a set of training sets (training setting) into the

network, and according to the difference between the actual output and expected output of the network,the connection weight is

adjusted, the training steps of the model are as follows:

(1) Data processing

In fact, due to the difference of magnitude, preprocessing of input variables of neural network is carried out to prevent over

fitting phenomenon in the process of computation. This paper selects 15 years data from 1996 to 2010 as training data, selects the

data from 1996 to 2015 as test data, and uses the method of maximum and minimum to normalize data:

( xk 0  xmin )
xk  (4)
( xmax  xmin )

Where in, x k is processed data, xk 0 is sample data, xmax is the maximum of sample data, and xmin is the minimum

of sample data.

(2) Parameter selection of neural network

The BP neural network model of this paper sets model parameters:the training time is 500, the training target is 0.1, and the

step length is 0.001. The standardized input variables and output variables y t are provided to the established BP neural network.

When the training time reaches to 500, the training is stopped. The result is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 preliminary training results of BP neural network

From the above results, it can be seen that BP neural network has good fitting performance when testing partial sample data,

but there is still a low fitting degree on some data processing.


2.4 Model Improvement
The BP neural network can be used in nonlinear systems to predict carbon emissions and other related data in the future

cement industry. In the aspect of prediction accuracy, the neural network model is greatly affected by the connection weights w ,

when the w set is not reasonable, the prediction results will have large errors. In order to make the BP neural network model

more accurate and effective, this paper uses the improved particle swarm algorithm (IPSO algorithm) to optimize model.

PSO algorithm is an optimization algorithm based on population, which can quickly find the optimal extreme value. In this

paper, PSO is applied to optimize the weights and parameters of the BP neural network model. The connection weights of the

network can be searched in a larger space, which makes the predicted output closer to the expected output. Although PSO has

fast convergence and versatility, it still has some disadvantages, such as premature convergence, low precision and low efficiency

of iterative search. In this paper, the adaptive mutation operator and the non-inertia weight coefficient are adopted to optimize the

PSO algorithm.

(1) Adaptive mutation operator. The selective genetic algorithm (genetic algorithm, GA) is a selective mutation strategy,it

changes the genetic value of some genetic algorithms, introduces the individuals of genetic group to the particle swarm

optimization algorithm and initializes the location variables of the particles on some dimensions according to the preset

probability, so as to increase the diversity of particles. In this way, search can be carried out in a larger and better space, and

particles jump out of the original optimal position from a reduced iterative search space. At the same time, the diversity of

particles increases, which is the possibility of finding the optimal value.

(2) The nonlinear inertia weight coefficient. The renewal equation of nonlinear inertia weight coefficients neither linear nor

constant , but decreases with the increase of iteration time, speed and location [40].

The variable inertia weight algorithm is applied to balance the global and local search ability of particles. The local search

ability is enhanced by the smaller inertia weight of the offspring iteration [41]. The variable inertia weight correlation formula is

as follows:

w( k )  wstart  ( wstart  wend )(2 k / Tmax  ( k / Tmax ) 2 ) (5)

Where in:w start is the initial weight, is set as 0.8; w end presents the inertia weight of final stage, is set as 0.5; k is the
current inertia; Tmax is the maximum inertia.

By using the IPSO algorithm, the connection weights w i of the neural network are encoded into particles X i . Fitness

value is the mean square error of network output when using the group weights. It is used to search for the best network

connection weights in the early setting of iteration time, and improves the accuracy of BP neural network prediction data by

using the best network connection weights. The objective function value is the difference value between the predicted data and

the actual data. The purpose is to seek the connection weight and threshold value when the function takes the minimum value,

and the specific formula is:

(6)
Vidk 1  wVidk  c1r1 ( Pidk  X idk )  c2 r2 ( Pgdk  X idk )

X idk 1  X idk  Pidk 1 (7)

Where in:  is the inertia weight, d  (1,2,, D ) represents the dimension of connection weight; i  (1,2,, n )
represents the number of connection weights; k is the number of current iterations; Vid is particle speed, c1 and c2 are
non-negative acceleration factors; r1 and r2 the random numbers distributing from 0 to 1. In order to prevent blind search,

the connection weights of the position and speed were limited in the interval [  X max , X max ]and[ Vmax ,Vmax ]. The parameter

settings include: race group number is 100, learning factor c1 =0.45449, c 2 =0.45449, particle search space (dimension) is 11,

iteration number is 1000, inertia weight is 0.5, new network weight matrix is obtained. The specific optimization process is as

follows:

(1)Initialize the PSO algorithm parameters. In the interval [ X min , X max ], the particle position is initialized randomly, and

set the speed of a random number in [ Vmin , Vmax ]. Then,this paper initializes individual extremes pi and global extremism
pg , and calculates the corresponding fitness ( pi ) and fitness ( pg ).

(2)Update the position and global extremism by iteration. According to the equation (2.8), the velocity vik of a particle is

updated. If the speed is over Vmax , the v ik will be set Vmax . According to the equation (2.9), the position of the particle x i is

updated. If a dimension value x ij of x i is in its domain, x ij is initialized again randomly in its domain. If fitness ( x i ) is

less than fitness ( pi ), then pi is set up to be equal to xi and the fitness ( pi ) is updated, then the fitness function is turned
to seek the appropriate fitness ( x i ). If the fitness ( pi ) is less than the fitness ( pg ), then pg is set up to be equal to pi
and the fitness ( pg ) is updated.

(3)Judge whether the particle meets the terminating condition. If it is not satisfied, then return to the operation of step 2; if it

is satisfied, the optimization results are output and the algorithm is end. And the final gbest is used as the connection weights of

neural network.

The algorithm flowchart of the IPSO-BP model is shown in Figure 3:

Figure 3 IPSO-BP model calculation process

This paper takes the connection weights of BP neural network in 2.2 as the initial value, optimize it with particle swarm

optimization algorithm and input and test the data of 2011-2015 years. The error diagram is shown in Figure 4:
Figure 4 BP neural network error map after PSO optimization

From the figure, it can be seen that the BP neural network optimized by PSO is closer to the actual value. The improved

IPSO-BP neural network model will be used to forecast carbon emissions and peak value in this paper.
3 Case Results and Analysis
IPSO-BP model has many advantages, such as positive information processing ability, outstanding fault tolerance and

associative memory, excellent adaptability and self-learning ability. From 2.1, it can be made sure that carbon emissions in

cement industry are affected by the factors such as coal consumption, cement production industrial electricity emissions and

industrial thermal emissions, and there is a relatively independent relationship between each factor. Therefore, the forecast of

carbon emissions in the cement industry is a nonlinear system with high uncertainty. Because the carbon emissions cannot be

forecasted by traditional methods, the IPSO-BP model can be used to forecast the output variables of the nonlinear system.

Comparing with other econometric methods, the prediction accuracy of IPSO-BP model is higher, and the error rate can be

controlled within 3%, it has wide application prospects.

According to the "cement industry planning in 13th five-Year" and “cement industry requirements” , this paper sets 44

scenarios to forecast the amount of carbon emissions using IPSO-BP model.


3.1Scenario Setting
According to the capacity plan issued by the cement industry association, the capacity utilization rate of cement industry in

2020 and 2030 should reach 60% and 80%. This paper sets the production of cement from 2020 to 2030, shown as table 2.

Table 2 Cement production setting

Cement production setting

Year 2020 2025 2030

Cement production
215980 231400 246832
(ten thousand tons)
3.1.1 Basic scenario data
In this paper, three times exponential smoothing is used to forecast the value of different factors from 2018 to 2040,and the

values are taken as the data in the basic scenario. According to different scenarios, the data of the new scenario is multiplied by a

certain proportion of the basic scene data, in which the production of cement is fixed. The basic scenario data is shown in table 3

and Figure5.

Table 3 Basic scenario data


Power consumption in the
Cement production (ten The total consumption of coal The heat emission industry
Year industry (Hundred kilowatts
thousand tons) industry (ten thousand tons) (Million-kilocalorie)
hours)

2018 226569.12 44898.10 995.53 3380.37


2019 219338.19 46084.78 1021.68 3465.46
2020 214416.75 47284.80 1048.13 3551.51
2021 216837.14 48498.14 1074.87 3638.52
2022 219190.52 49724.81 1101.91 3726.49
2023 221474.86 50964.81 1129.24 3815.43
2024 226519.62 52218.14 1156.87 3905.34
2025 231618.73 53484.80 1184.80 3996.20
2026 233812.55 54764.78 1213.02 4088.03
2027 235930.53 56058.10 1241.54 4180.82
2028 237970.63 57364.74 1270.36 4274.58
2029 243087.80 58684.71 1299.47 4369.30
2030 248257.30 60018.02 1328.88 4464.98
2031 248257.30 61364.65 1358.59 4561.63
2032 248257.30 62724.61 1388.59 4659.23
2033 248257.30 64097.89 1418.89 4757.81
2034 248257.30 65484.51 1449.48 4857.34
2035 248257.30 66884.46 1480.37 4957.84
2036 248257.30 68297.73 1511.56 5059.30
2037 248257.30 69724.34 1543.04 5161.73
2038 248257.30 71164.27 1574.82 5265.12
2039 248257.30 72617.53 1606.90 5369.47
2040 248257.30 74084.12 1639.27 5474.78
2041 248257.30 75564.04 1671.94 5581.06
2042 248257.30 77057.29 1704.91 5688.31
2043 248257.30 78563.86 1738.17 5796.51
2044 248257.30 80083.77 1771.73 5905.68
2045 248257.30 81617.00 1805.59 6015.81
2046 248257.30 83163.56 1839.74 6126.91
2047 248257.30 84723.46 1874.19 6238.96
2048 248257.30 86296.68 1908.93 6351.99
2049 248257.30 87883.23 1943.97 6465.97
2050 248257.30 89483.10 1979.31 6580.92
x 10
5
The indicators smooth curve
5

data
2

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
year
Figure5 the value of each input variable under the three exponential smoothing prediction method
3.1.2 New scenarios data setting

The second generation dry cement technology is a new technology system which is mainly advocated by the cement

industry. The "cement industry planning in 13th five-Year" clearly requirements that 60% production lines of cement industry

should reach the world’s leading level by 2020. This paper selects 4 technologies that is related to carbon emissions in the

second generation dry cement technology, which are waste safety disposal and resource utilization technology(the following is

called technology A) , new production technology of cement clinker with low carbon and high standard number (the following is

called technology B), high efficiency and energy saving material bed grinding technology (the following is called technology C)

and high energy and low nitrogen preheating pre-decomposition and sintering technology(the following is called technology D).

In this paper, some technical indexes of cement industry are compared with the requirements of the second generation dry

cement technology, which were shown in table 4[16][42].

Table 4 Comparison of some technical indexes in cement industry

A B C D

Comprehensive Comprehensive Specific Comprehensive Burn up


Alternative Heat consumption
coal consumption coal carbon power system
fuel rate of clinker burning
of cement clinker consumption of emissions of consumption of power
cement clinker cement cement grinding consumption

clinker

Existing
720kcal/kg.cl 0 720kcal/kg.cl - 36kWh/t 1734kJ/kg.ck 55kWh/t
standards

Requirements

for the second

generation of Decrease Decrease Decrease <2680kJ/kg.cl(64


>40% 27kWh/t 18kWh/t
new cement 30%-40% 10% 10% 0kcal/kg.cl)

dry

technology

The table5 suggests that the influence of four technologies on cement industry, including coal consumption, clinker carbon

emissions, electricity consumption, thermal consumption and so on. The technical impact is shown in table 5:

Table 5 The influence of the second generation dry cement technology on the related links of carbon emissions

Fuel Material Heat energy Electric energy


The link that affects the calculation of carbon emissions
combustion calcinations consumption consumption

New dry cement


1 Basic scenario Invariable Invariable Invariable Invariable
method

Waste safety disposal and resource

2 utilization technology 60% Invariable Invariable Invariable

New production technology of cement

clinker with low carbon and high


3 90% 90% Invariable Invariable
The second standard number

generation dry B

cement High efficiency and energy saving

4 technology material bed grinding technology Invariable Invariable Invariable 91.40%

High energy and low nitrogen

preheating pre-decomposition and


5 Invariable Invariable 154.56% 64.76%
sintering technology

According to the relevant policy requirements of the cement industry, this paper sets up 60 % production lines in 2020 with

the second generation dry cement technology. On the basis of this ,80% of the production lines use the second generation dry

cement technology in 2025 and all of the production lines use the second generation dry cement technology in 2030.The 15

technical scenarios (take an example as the year 2020)shown as table 6.

Table 6 Parameter setting of new scenarios


Technology A use ratio

Technology used in (using the technology Technology B Technology C Technology D


number
production line production line / total production line ratio production line ratio production line ratio

production line, right same)

1 A 60% 0 0 0

2 B 0 60% 0 0

3 C 0 0 60% 0

4 D 0 0 0 60%

5 AB 30% 30% 0 0

6 AC 30% 0 30% 0

7 AD 30% 0 0 30%

8 BC 0 30% 30% 0

9 BD 0 30% 0 30%

10 CD 0 0 30% 30%

11 ABC 20% 20% 20% 0

12 ABD 20% 20% 0 20%

13 ACD 20% 0 20% 20%

14 BCD 0 20% 20% 20%

15 ABCD 15% 15% 15% 15%


3.1.3Sensitivity analysis
In technical scenarios of 5-15, the proportion of different technologies is equivalent. In order to find out the sensitive factors

that influence the carbon emissions index, this paper sets up 28 sensitivity analysis scenario, as shown in table 7.

Table 7 Sensitivity analysis scenario setting

Sensitivity analysis scenario setting

5 A30% B30% 30% 30% 0 0

5.1 A40% B20% 40% 20% 0 0

5.2 A20% B40% 20% 40% 0 0

6 A30% C30% 30% 0 30% 0

6.1 A40% C20% 40% 0 20% 0

6.2 A20% C40% 20% 0 40% 0

7 A30% D30% 30% 0 0 30%

7.1 A40% D20% 40% 0 0 20%

7.2 A20% D40% 20% 0 0 40%


8 B30% C30% 0 30% 30% 0

8.1 B40% C20% 0 40% 20% 0

8.2 B20% C40% 0 20% 40% 0

9 B30% D30% 0 30% 0 30%

9.1 B40% D20% 0 40% 0 20%

9.2 B20% D40% 0 20% 0 40%

10 C30% D30% 0 0 30% 30%

10.1 C40% D20% 0 0 40% 20%

10.2 C20% D40% 0 0 20% 40%

11 A20% B20% C20% 20% 20% 20% 0

11.1 A+20% B-10% C-10% 40% 10% 10% 0

11.2 A-10% B+20% C-10% 10% 40% 10% 0

11.3 A-10% B-10% C+20% 10% 10% 40% 0

12 A20% B20% D20% 20% 20% 0 20%

12.1 A+20% B-10% D-10% 40% 10% 0 10%

12.2 A-10% B+20% D-10% 10% 40% 0 10%

12.3 A-10% B-10% D+20% 10% 10% 0 40%

13 A20% C20% D20% 20% 0 20% 20%

13.1 A+20% C-10% D-10% 40% 0 10% 10%

13.2 A-10% C+20% D-10% 10% 0 40% 10%

13.3 A-10% C-10% D+20% 10% 0 10% 40%

14 B20% C20% D20% 0 20% 20% 20%

14.1 B+20% C-10% D-10% 0 40% 10% 10%

14.2 B-10% C+20% D-10% 0 10% 40% 10%

14.3 B-10% C-10% D+20% 0 10% 10% 40%

15 ABCD 15% 15% 15% 15%

15.1 A+30% B-10% C-10% D-10% 45% 5% 5% 5%

15.2 A-10% B+30% C-10% D-10% 5% 45% 5% 5%

15.3 A-10% B-10% C+30% D-10% 5% 5% 45% 5%

15.4 A-10% B-10% C-10% D+30% 5% 5% 5% 45%


3.2 Forecast by using the IPSO-BP model
IPSO-BP model is used to forecast carbon emissions in all 44 scenarios. Because of the different initialization weights of the

neural network, the results are random. To improve the accuracy of the forecast, the following data use the average of the 200

times. The forecast of carbon emissions from basic scenario is shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6 The forecast of carbon emissions from basic scenario

Single technology scenario prediction results (scenario 1-4)is shown in Figure 7.

a)Scenario 1 carbon emissions prediction b)Scenario 2 carbon emissions prediction

c)Scenario 3 carbon emissions prediction d)Scenario 4 carbon emissions prediction

Figure7carbon emissions forecast in a single technology scenario

The figure demonstrates that the scenario 4 has the earliest time of carbon emissions peak. The earliest time of carbon

emissions peak is 2021.Scenario 3 has the earlier time of carbon emissions peak than scenario 1 and scenario 2.Scenario 1 and

Scenario 2 have the latest time of carbon emissions peak, which is 2030.Meanwhile, the lowest carbon emissions peak is also

emerged in Scene 4, with a peak of 13 million 613 thousand tons. the highest carbon emissions peak is emerged in Scene 3, with

a peak of 15 million 697 thousand tons. The four scenarios demonstrate that scenario 3 and Scene 4 are better than scenarios 1
and scenario 2 on the impact of carbon emissions reduction.

The two technology combination scenarios forecast results (scenario 5-10):

In this part, sensitivity analysis is carried out in two technology combinations. When the total proportion of input

technology is constant, the percentage of input of a technology is changed (usually in the range of 10%).The results and

sensitivity analysis of scenario 5 are shown in Figure 8.

a)Scenario 5 carbon emissions prediction

b)S

ensitivity analysis scenario 5.1 c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 5.2

Figure8 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 5

In scenario 5, the peak time of carbon emissions is 2030, and the peak value of carbon emissions is 15 million 104 thousand

tons. Through the sensitivity analysis of scenario 5, it can be concluded that increasing the proportion of B technology will bring

the peak value of carbon emissions ahead of schedule, and the peak value will also decrease.

The prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 6 are shown in Figure 9.
a)Scenario 6 carbon emissions prediction

b)S

ensitivity analysis scenario 6.1 c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 6.2

Figure9 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 6

In scenario 6, the peak time of carbon emissions is 2026, and the peak value of carbon emissions is 14 million 491 thousand

tons. Through the sensitivity analysis of scenario 6, it can be concluded that changing the proportion of technology can not lead

to the peak time of carbon emissions or the peak value of carbon emissions.

The prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 7 are shown in Figure 10.

a)Scenario 7 carbon emissions prediction


b)S

ensitivity analysis scenario 7.1 c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 7.2

Figure10 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 7

In scenario 7, the peak time of carbon emissions is 2024, and the peak value of carbon emissions is 14 million 160 thousand

tons. Through the sensitivity analysis of scenario 7, it can be concluded that increasing the proportion of A technology will bring

the peak value of carbon emissions ahead of schedule, and the peak value will also decrease.

The prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 8 are shown in Figure11.

a)Scenario 8 carbon emissions prediction

b)Sensitivity analysis scenario 8.1 c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 8.2

Figure11 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 8

In scenario 8, the peak time of carbon emissions is 2023, and the peak value of carbon emissions is 14 million 482 thousand

tons. Through the sensitivity analysis of scenario 8, it can be concluded that changing the proportion of technology can not lead
to the peak time of carbon emissions or the peak value of carbon emissions.

The prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 9 are shown in Figure 12.

a)Scenario 9 carbon emissions prediction

b)Sensitivity analysis scenario 9.1 c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 9.2

Figure12 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 9

In scenario 9, the peak time of carbon emissions is 2021, and the peak value of carbon emissions is 16 million 115 thousand

tons. Through the sensitivity analysis of scenario 9, it can be concluded that changing the proportion of technology can not lead

to the peak time of carbon emissions or the peak value of carbon emissions.

The prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 10 are shown in Figure 13.

a)Scenario 10 carbon emissions prediction


b)S

ensitivity analysis scenario 10.1 c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 10.2

Figure13 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 10

In scenario 10, the peak time of carbon emissions is 2020, and the peak value of carbon emissions is 15 million 550

thousand tons. Through the sensitivity analysis of scenario 10, it can be concluded that changing the proportion of technology

can not lead to the peak time of carbon emissions or the peak value of carbon emissions.

The three technology combination scenario prediction results (scenario 11-14):

In this part, sensitivity analysis is carried out in three technology combinations. When the total proportion of input

technology is constant, the percentage of input of a technology is changed (usually in the range of 10%-20%).The forecast results

and sensitivity analysis of scenario 11 are shown in Figure 14.

a)Scenario 11 carbon emissions prediction b)Sensitivity analysis scenario 11.1

c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 11.2 d)Sensitivity analysis scenario 11.3

Figure14 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 11


In scenario 11 carbon emissions peak time is 2026, carbon emissions peak is 13 million 479 thousand tons. Through the

sensitivity analysis of scenario 11, it can be concluded that increasing the proportion of B technology will bring the peak value of

carbon emissions ahead of schedule, and the peak value will also decrease.

The prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 12 are shown in Figure 15.

a)Scenario 12 carbon emissions prediction b)Sensitivity analysis scenario 12.1

c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 12.2 d)Sensitivity analysis scenario 12.3

Figure15 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 12

In scenario 12 carbon emissions peak time is 2026, carbon emissions peak is 14 million 635 thousand tons. Through the

sensitivity analysis of scenario 12, it can be concluded that increasing the proportion of D technology will bring the peak value of

carbon emissions ahead of schedule, and the peak value will also decrease.

The prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 13 are shown in Figure16.

a)Scenario 13 carbon emissions prediction b) Sensitivity analysis scenario 13.1


c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 13.2 d)Sensitivity analysis scenario 13.3

Figure16 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 13

In scenario 13, the peak time of carbon emissions is 2021, and the peak value of carbon emissions is 14 million 569

thousand tons. Through the sensitivity analysis of scenario 13, it can be concluded that changing the proportion of any

technology can not lead to the peak time of carbon emissions or the peak value of carbon emissions.

The prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 14 are shown in Figure 17.

a)Scenario 14 carbon emissions prediction b)Sensitivity analysis scenario 14.1

c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 14.2 d)Sensitivity analysis scenario 14.3

Figure17 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 14

In scenario 14, the peak time of carbon emissions is 2020, and the peak value of carbon emissions is 14 million 6 thousand

tons. Through the sensitivity analysis of scenario 14, it can be concluded that changing the proportion of technology can not lead

to the peak time of carbon emissions or the peak value of carbon emissions.
This part sets up sensitivity analysis in four combinations scenarios, and changes the percentage of a technology input

(usually floating in the range of 10%-30%) when the total proportion of input technology is constant. The prediction results and

sensitivity analysis of scenario 15 are shown in Figure 18.

a)Scenario 15 carbon emissions prediction

b)Sensitivity analysis scenario 15.1 c)Sensitivity analysis scenario 15.2

d)Sensitivity analysis scenario 15.3 e)Sensitivity analysis scenario 15.4

Figure18 Prediction results and sensitivity analysis of scenario 15

In scenario 15, the peak time of carbon emissions is 2023, and the peak value of carbon emissions is 17 million 156

thousand tons. Through the sensitivity analysis of scenario 15, it can be concluded that increasing the proportion of B technology

will bring the peak value of carbon emissions ahead of schedule, and the peak value will also decrease.

The results of carbon peak time and carbon peak based on all 44 scenarios are summarized, as shown in the following table

8.
Table 8 overall scenario prediction of peak time and value of carbon emissions

Scenario Use of technology and details Peak time of carbon emissions carbon emissions peak

This table has a comprehensive ratio of 60%, automatically adjusted in proportion to 80% in 2025, and automatically adjusted in

proportion to 100% in 2030.

BAU 2037 1847


1 A60% 2030 1439.1
2 B60% 2030 1374.3
3 C60% 2025 1569.7
4 D60% 2021 1361.3
5 A30% B30% 2030 1510.4
5.1 A40% B20% 2030 1606.6
5.2 A20% B40% 2026 1300+
6 A30% C30% 2026 1449.1
6.1 A40% C20% 2032 2000+
6.2 A20% C40% 2030 1486
7 A30% D30% 2024 1416
7.1 A40% D20% 2020 1436
7.2 A20% D40% 2025 1515.5
8 B30% C30% 2023 1448.2
8.1 B40% C20% 2033 1357.4
8.2 B20% C40% 2044 1929.6
9 B30% D30% 2021 1611.5
9.1 B40% D20% 2025 1734.9
9.2 B20% D40% 2030 1715.5
10 C30% D30% 2020 1555
10.1 C40% D20% 2025 1851
10.2 C20% D40% 2030 1867
11 A20% B20% C20% 2026 1347.9
11.1 A+20% B-10% C-10% 2032 1507.9
11.2 A-10% B+20% C-10% 2030 1431.3
11.3 A-10% B-10% C+20% 2038 1452
12 A20% B20% D20% 2026 1463.5
12.1 A+20% B-10% D-10% 2030 1409.2
12.2 A-10% B+20% D-10% 2033 1637.1
12.3 A-10% B-10% D+20% 2020 1430.2
13 A20% C20% D20% 2021 1456.9
13.1 A+20% C-10% D-10% 2026 1382.9
13.2 A-10% C+20% D-10% 2038 1747.3
13.3 A-10% C-10% D+20% 2030 1756.7
14 B20% C20% D20% 2020 1400.6
14.1 B+20% C-10% D-10% 2025 1554.3
14.2 B-10% C+20% D-10% 2034 1767.7
14.3 B-10% C-10% D+20% 2030 1403.6
15 A15%B15%C15%D15% 2023 1715.6
15.1 A+30% B-10% C-10% D-10% 2030 1741.7
15.2 A-10% B+30% C-10% D-10% 2020 1787.7
15.3 A-10% B-10% C+30% D-10% 2030 1576
15.4 A-10% B-10% C-10% D+30% 2033 1534

3.3 Comparison of Scenarios


By comparing 1 basic scenario, 14 technical scenarios, and 29 sensitive analysis scenarios, the carbon reduction effect of a

single technology is not determined by the proportion of its impact. The impact of technology A is 40%, while the effect of

technology C effect is less than 10%. However, the emission reduction effect of technology C is stronger than A.

Sometimes, too complex technical combinations are unable to achieve the best emission reduction effects. Part of the

technology is a sensitive factor of carbon emissions, which will play a positive role in carbon emissions; on the other hand, if

part of the technology investment is excessive, the carbon emissions reduction effect will be not ideal. So the best effect of

carbon emissions can be achieved only by a reasonable combination of different technologies. The results suggest that the change

of C and D technology has a greater impact on carbon emissions; technology A and B is more sensitive to carbon emissions.

4Conclusions and Policy Implications


4.1Conclusions
In this study, the IPSO-BP model is used to forecast the carbon emissions peak in the cement industry. According to the

different proportion of technology combination, 44 scenarios were set up to forecast Peak situation of carbon emissions in

cement industry. According to the results, the carbon emissions reduction effect of the second generation dry cement technology

can be explored.

From the above results, the following 4 conclusions can be draw. In the first place, if the "cement industry capacity action

plan and "cement industry planning in 13th Five-Year" implemented smoothly, whether by any combination of the second

generation of new dry cement technology, the cement industry will reach the peak of carbon emissions before 2030, the peak

value is less than 17 million 156 thousand tons. Compared with the basic situation, the peak time is at least 7 years ahead of time,

and the peak value of carbon emissions decreases by nearly 1 million tons.

One more point needs to be pointed out that under the scenario of the second generation dry cement technology, the carbon

emissions peak time is ahead of schedule and the carbon emissions peak value reduces. The results of this study suggest that the

emission reduction effect of technology D is the most prominent. Under the same conditions, the effect of technology C is similar

to technology D, the effect of technology A is similar to technology B. Compared with other technologies, the technology A is

not effective, but it still has a outstanding effect on carbon emissions reduction.

And then, in a variety of technology combinations, the peak time of carbon emissions is the earliest when the B,C and D

technologies are used, which appears in 2020; the peak time of carbon emissions is the latest in 2030 with the use of the A and B.

When using A, B and C technology, the peak value is the lowest, which is 13 million 479 thousand tons; the peak value of all

four technologies are the highest, which is 17 million 156 thousand tons. The above results demonstrate that the carbon

emissions reduction of the three technologies is the best.

The last but not the least, this paper sets up different sensitivity analysis scenarios by adjusting the proportion of different

technologies. Results manifest that the increase of the proportion of A and B technologies tends to have a superior effect on

carbon emissions, but the changes in the inputs of C and D technologies doesn't have a positive impact on carbon emissions.
4.2Policy Implications
Based on the above conclusions, the following policy recommendations can be given to cement industry in China. First of
all, the second generation dry cement technology should be put into operation as soon as possible, which is of great significance

for controlling carbon emissions. When the second generation dry cement technology is put into use in the production line, the

combination of various technologies should be paid attention to. The technical combination of B,C and D technology is the most

prominent effect on carbon emissions reduction.

Secondly, it is imperative for the cement industry to diminish the industrial capacities. Phasing out the backward and

redundant industrial capacities is the foundation of the cement industry to control carbon emissions. The implementation of

carbon emissions reduction is based on the gradual control of production capacity, the stable production and the increase of

capacity utilization. Otherwise, because of the increasing production of the cement industry, it is impossible to achieve the peak

of carbon emissions.

Thirdly, cement industry should attach importance to the use of new technology and new equipment, drive the development

of cement industry through innovation, and change the severe situation of carbon emissions and overcapacity at present through

technological advantages. Cement industry should speed up the technological transformation. In view of the rich experience of

developed countries accumulated in energy saving and emission reduction, which China should learn [43].

Fourthly, cement enterprises should set up a sense of carbon emissions reduction, maintain a stable and rapid economic

development, and prevent further carbon emissions. As the producers and managers of cement enterprises, the consciousness of

carbon emissions reduction should be set up. Only by implementing the policy conscientiously and giving full play to the

initiative of enterprises, the goal that Chinese government's commitment to achieve the peak of carbon emissions no later than

the 2030 Paris climate conference can be really achieved.

Acknowledgments: This study is supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China (Grant NO. 15BGL145),
the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (NO. 2016MS125) and Philosophy and Social Science Research

Base of Hebei Province.

Author Contributions: Wei Li designed this paper and made overall guidance; Shubin Gao wrote the paper
and debugged program. All authors read and agreed to the final article.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
[1] Sun W, Wang C, Zhang C. Factor analysis and forecasting of CO 2 emissions in Hebei, using extreme learning machine based on particle swarm

optimization. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2017;162:1095-101.

[2] Schellnhuber H, Rahmstorf S, Winkelmann R. Why the right climate target was agreed in Paris. . Nat Clim Chang. 2016;6:649–53.

[3] Li W, Lu C, Ding Y. A Systematic Simulating Assessment within Reach Greenhouse Gas Target by Reducing PM2.5 Concentrations in China. Polish

Journal Of Environmental Studies. 2017;26(2):683-98.

[4] Global Carbon Atlas. 2016;http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/cn/CO2-emissions (accessed on 25 July 2017).

[5] Guan D, Peters G, Weber C, Hubacek K. Journey to world top emitter: an analysis of the driving forces of China’s recent CO2 emissions surge.

Geophys Res Lett. 2009;36:1-5.

[6] Li W, Lu C. The research on setting a unified interval of carbon price benchmark in the national carbon trading market of China. Applied Energy.

2015;155:728-39.

[7] Council TS. The 13th Five-Year Plan for the Control of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 2016.

[8] Benhelal E, Zahedi G, Shamsaei E, Bahadori A. Global strategies and potentials to curb CO2 emissions in cement industry. J Clean Prod.

2013;51:142–61.
[9] Xu B, Lin B. Assessing CO2 emissions in China’s iron and steel industry: a dynamic vector autoregression mode. Applied Energy. 2016;161:375–86.

[10] Ruijven BV, Vuuren DV, Boskaljon W, Neelis M, Saygin D, Patel M. Long-term model-based projections of energy use and CO2 emissions from the

global steel and cement industries. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2016;112:15–36.

[11] Fan Y. Greenhouse gas emissions abatement study: cost, path and policy science press. 2011.

[12] Ali MB, Saidur R, Hossain M. A review on emission analys. . Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2011;15(5):2252–61.

[13] Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center.1.http://cdiac.ornl.gov. 2012.

[14] Xu JH, Fleiter T, Fan Y, Eichhammer W. CO2 emissions reduction potential in China’s cement industry compared to IEA’s Cement Technology

Roadmap up to 2050. Applied Energy 2014;130(2014):592–602.

[15] Xufeng W, Peiwu Z. Analysis on the current status of energy consumption limit standard in domestic cement industry. Cement engineering

2014(05):1-5.

[16] Wang Y, Zhu Q, Geng Y. Trajectory and driving factors for GHG emissions in the Chinese cement industry. J Clean Prod. 2013;53(252-60).

[17] Lin B, Zhang Z. Carbon emissions in China’s cement industry: a sector and policy analysis. . Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2016;58:1387–94.

[18] Lin B, Ouyang X. Analysis of energy-related CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions and reduction potential in the Chinese non-metallic mineral products

industry. Energy. 2014;68:688–97.

[19] J L, J S, Li J. Exploring reduction potential of carbon intensity based on back propagation neural network and scenario analysis: A case of Beijing,

China. energies. 2016;9:615.

[20] Kun SJ, Yu Z. China 's Carbon Emission Scenario Forecast Based on BP Neural Network. Science and Technology and Engineering.

2011;11(17):4108-11+16.

[21] Shen W, Liu Y, Yan B, Wang J, He P, Zhou C, et al. Cement industry of China: Driving force, environment impact and sustainable development.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017;75:618-28.

[22] Kumar S, Madlener R. CO2 emission reduction potential assessment using renewable energy in India. Energy. 2016;97:273–82.

[23] Azam M, Othman J, Begum RA, Abdullah SMS, Nor NGM. Energy consumption and emission projection for the road transport sector in Malaysia:

An application of the LEAP model. Environ Dev Sustain. 2016;18:1027–47.

[24] Cai W, Wang C, Chen J, Wang K, Zhang Y, Lu X. Comparison of CO2 emission scenarios and mitigation opportunities in China’s five sectors in

2020. EnergyPolicy. 2008;36(2008):1181–94.

[25] Cai B, Wang J, He J, Geng Y. Evaluating CO2 emission performance in China’s cement industry: an enterprise perspective. Applied Energy.

2016;166(2016):191-200.

[26] Cui S, Liu W. Analysis of CO2 emission mitigation potential in cement production process (in Chinese). China Cem. 2008;4(2008):57–9.

[27] Li N, Ma D, Chen W. Quantifying the impacts of decarbonisation in China’s cement sector: a perspective from an integrated assessment approach.

Applie Energy. 2017;185:1840–8.

[28] Wen ZG, Chen M, Meng FX. Evaluation of energy saving potential in China’s cement industry using the Asian-Pacific Integrated Model and the

technology promotion policy analysis. Energy Policy. 2015;77(2015):227–37.

[29] Xu JH, Fleiter T, Fan Y. Eichhammer W. CO2 emissions reduction potential in China’s cement industry compared to IEA’s Cement Technology

Roadmap up to 2050. Applied Energy. 2014;130(2014):592–602.

[30] Wang YF, Höller S, Viebahn P, Hao ZP. Integrated assessment of CO2 reduction technologies in China’s cement industry. Int J Greenhouse Gas

Control. 2014;20(2014):27–36.

[31] Uzlu E, Kankal M, Akpınar A, Dede T. Estimates of energy consumption in Turkey using neural networks with the teaching–learning-based

optimization algorithm. Energy. 2014;75:295-303.

[32] Hong DJ, Wang ZY. Analysis of the accounting method and report guide for greenhouse gas emission in China cement production enterprises (Trial

Implementation) Quality and certification 2017(06):50-3.

[33] Wang SB. Research on accounting method of greenhouse gas emission in cement industry Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Social
Sciences 2012.

[34] J.L.Deng. Introduction to grey system theory. JGrey Syst. 1989;1:1–24.

[35] Liu SF, Cai H, Yang YJ, Ying C. Research progress of grey relational analysis model. Syst Eng Theory Pract. 2013;33:2041–6.

[36] Tian M, Liu SF, Pu ZK. Review of the grey relational degree algorithm model. Stat Decis 2008;1:24-7.

[37] National Bureau of Statistics. China Statistical Yearbook 2014; China Statistical Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2015.

[38] National Bureau of Statistics. China Energy Statistical Yearbook 2014; China Statistical Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2015.

[39] Ji JP. Research on driving factors of China's carbon emissions growth based on input-output model Peking University 2016.

[40] Sun W, Xu Y. Using a back propagation neural network based on improved particle swarm optimization to study the influential factors of carbon

dioxide emissions in Hebei Province, China. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016;112:1282-91.

[41] Zhang XP, Du YP, Qin GQ, Zheng Q. An adaptive particle swarm optimization algorithm with dynamic change of inertia weight. J Xi’an Jiaotong

Univ. 2005;39:1039–42.

[42] China, Federation, of, architectural, materials. "Research and development standard for the second generation of new dry cement technical

equipment" 2014.

[43] Liu W, Qin B. Low-carbon city initiatives in China: A review from the policy paradigm perspective. Cities. 2016;51:131–8.
MATLAB File (.fig, .m)
Click here to download MATLAB File (.fig, .m): matlab figure.zip