Collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of environmental protection, and particularly relates to a pollution reduction and carbon reduction technology collaborative evaluation method, which comprises the following steps: S1, calculating the collaborative degree of a technical path on multiple pollutants and carbon emission through a collaborative effect coefficient model, the synergistic effect coefficient model calculates a synergistic effect coefficient based on pollutant emission reduction, greenhouse gas emission reduction and a preset weight coefficient; s2, calculating a cooperative control emission reduction equivalent ER-eq based on an equivalent weight coefficient, wherein the equivalent weight coefficient comprises a greenhouse gas weight coefficient and a pollutant equivalent weight coefficient; and S3, on the basis of the cooperative control emission reduction equivalent ER-eq, cooperative emission reduction cost EC-eq is calculated through an economic cost model, and the economic cost model comprises project investment cost, operation cost and energy-saving and efficiency-increasing benefits. According to the method, the collaborative emission reduction effect of the measures can be comprehensively and visually reflected, the collaborative emission reduction cost is accurately estimated, a scientific decision basis is provided for policy formulators and enterprises, and the method is successfully applied to pollution and carbon reduction projects in the automobile industry.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the field of environmental protection technology, and specifically relates to a collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction. Background Art

[0002] At present, the academic community has confirmed that atmospheric pollutant emission reduction measures and greenhouse gas emission reduction measures can produce synergistic emission reduction effects. Researchers have proposed that by optimizing the combination of pollution reduction and carbon reduction policies, costs can be minimized or benefits can be maximized. Therefore, in order to achieve synergistic benefits of pollution reduction and carbon reduction, it is necessary to find appropriate quantitative methods and determine the best implementation points. The economic cost model of pollution reduction and carbon reduction provides decision support for policymakers, enterprises and the public by evaluating the economic costs of technologies or projects in reducing pollutant emissions and reducing carbon emissions. At present, there are many methods for evaluating the economic costs of pollution reduction and carbon reduction technologies, including life cycle cost analysis (LCA) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Although these methods can reveal the economic feasibility of technologies to a certain extent, they usually fail to fully consider the synergistic effect - that is, the comprehensive benefits brought about by reducing pollutants and carbon emissions at the same time.

[0003] The calculation formula for emission reduction costs in the article "Evaluation of the Synergistic Control Effect and Path Design for Deep Decarbonization in the Steel and Cement Industries" is as follows:

[0004]

[0005] Where: C i，j ——the cost of reducing emissions of unit pollutant j by emission reduction measure i;

[0006] CC i — Pollutant control costs of emission reduction measure i (including construction and operation costs);

[0007] MB i —Energy-saving and efficiency-enhancing benefits of emission reduction measure i;

[0008] Q i,j ——The emission reduction amount of pollutant j caused by emission reduction measure i.

[0009] However, the above formula can only describe the unit emission reduction cost of a technology for a specific pollutant in a limited way, and has significant limitations. Summary of the Invention

[0010] In response to the defects of the existing technology, the present invention proposes a collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction. This method can comprehensively and intuitively reflect the collaborative emission reduction effects of measures, accurately estimate the collaborative emission reduction costs, and provide policymakers and enterprises with a scientific decision-making basis. It has been successfully applied in pollution reduction and carbon reduction projects in the automotive industry.

[0011] The present invention is achieved in that:

[0012] A collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction includes the following steps:

[0013] S1. Calculate the synergy of the technology path for multiple pollutants and carbon emissions using a synergy coefficient model, where the synergy coefficient is calculated based on the pollutant emission reduction, greenhouse gas emission reduction, and a preset weight coefficient;

[0014] S2. Calculate the coordinated control emission reduction equivalent ER- based on the equivalent weight coefficient eq , the equivalent weight coefficient includes a greenhouse gas weight coefficient and a pollutant equivalent weight coefficient;

[0015] S3, based on coordinated control emission reduction equivalent ER- eq , calculate the collaborative emission reduction cost EC- through the economic cost model eq The economic cost model includes project investment cost, operating cost and energy-saving and efficiency-enhancing benefits.

[0016] Furthermore, the synergy coefficient model in S1 is as follows:

[0017]

[0018] (Formula 2);

[0019] Where:

[0020] R i -- Synergistic effect coefficient of emission reduction measure i (the setting of measures is based on technical paths such as energy-saving transformation, energy structure adjustment, process technology improvement, pollution control upgrade, and energy cleaning. Specific measures can be set according to the conditions of each industry; the setting method can refer to the specific measures in the example application of the automotive industry in the example);

[0021] R GHGs ——Greenhouse gas weight coefficient, including the weight values ​​of CO2, CH4 and N2O;

[0022] Q i,j ——the amount of emission reduction of pollutant j achieved by emission reduction measure i;

[0023] β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, and μ are the equivalent weight coefficients of pollutants exceeding the standard, including the equivalent weight values ​​of SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste;

[0024] n j ——weight value of pollutants exceeding the standard;

[0025] Q i,c ——Reduction in greenhouse gas (CO2) emissions due to emission reduction measures i.

[0026] The synergistic effect coefficient model is introduced to calculate the synergy degree of each pollutant emission reduction and carbon emission reduction of the technical path (such as technical transformation, operation optimization, energy-saving transformation, photovoltaic power generation, etc.), so as to obtain the synergistic effect coefficient of each type of pollution. This helps to more intuitively reflect the synergistic emission reduction effect of the measures. By introducing the synergistic control emission reduction equivalent (ER- eq This key parameter quantifies the synergistic control effects of multiple pollutants and carbon emissions into specific emission reductions, jointly calculating the impact of changes in carbon emissions. This helps to more intuitively evaluate the pollution and carbon reduction effects of technologies, providing strong decision-making support for policymakers and businesses.

[0027] Furthermore, the coordinated control emission reduction equivalent ER- eq =∑Q GHGs ×R GHGs +R Ps ×∑(Q Ps ×n j ); (Formula 3);

[0028] Expanding formula 3, we get:

[0029] ER- eq =R GHGs ×α1Q CO2 +R GHGs ×α2Q CH4 +R GHGs ×α3Q N2O +R Ps ×(n j ×βQ SO2 +n j ×γQ NOX +n j ×δQ VOCs +n j ×εQ NH3-N +n j ×ζQ COD +n j ×μQ 固废 ); (Formula 4)

[0030] Where:

[0031] ER- eq - Coordinated control of emission reduction equivalents;

[0032] R GHGs ——weight coefficients of greenhouse gases CO2, CH4 and N2O;

[0033] R Ps ——Weight coefficients of pollutants SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste;

[0034] Q GHGs- Greenhouse gas emission reductions, including CO2, CH4, and N2O;

[0035] Q Ps ——Reduction in emissions of pollutants including SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste;

[0036] n j ——Pollutants include weighted values ​​of SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste;

[0037] α——equivalent weight coefficient of greenhouse gases CO2, CH4, and N2O;

[0038] β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, and μ are the equivalent weight coefficients of the pollutants exceeding the standard, namely SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste.

[0039] Furthermore, the economic cost model in S3 is:

[0040] C=C I +n(C O -R V ); (Formula 5)

[0041] In the formula: C——the total economic investment required to implement the project, that is, the project investment cost C I plus the operating cost C in n years O Minus profit value R V The value of

[0042] C I - Project investment cost, which is the sum of monetary expenditures of materialized and living labor expended on fixed asset investment projects;

[0043] C o - operating costs, which are expenses that must be paid during the implementation process;

[0044] R V ——Energy saving and efficiency improvement benefits;

[0045] n——years.

[0046] The model not only considers the initial investment cost of the project (C I ), and also includes the operating costs (C O ) and energy-saving and efficiency-enhancing benefits (R V This full life cycle cost consideration approach makes the estimation results more comprehensive and accurate, and can truly reflect the economic feasibility of technology applications.

[0047] Furthermore, the collaborative emission reduction cost model in S3 is:

[0048] EC- eq=C / ER- eq ; (Formula 6)

[0049] Where:

[0050] EC- eq - Collaborative emission reduction costs, which are the net costs per unit of collaborative emission reduction equivalent, i.e. the economic input required to achieve a certain emission reduction effect;

[0051] ER- eq ——Synergistic control emission reduction equivalent refers to the total emission reduction of multiple pollutants and carbon emissions achieved simultaneously in the process of implementing pollution reduction and carbon reduction technologies.

[0052] The model can accurately calculate the cost of collaborative emission reduction (EC- eq This cost not only includes direct input costs, but also takes into account indirect revenue impacts, thus ensuring the accuracy and rationality of cost estimates.

[0053] The collaborative control emission reduction equivalent is applied to the calculation of economic benefits, and the concept of years is cited in the economic cost accounting. This can calculate the benefits of the project after a period of implementation, providing more powerful decision-making for government makers and enterprises.

[0054] The technical effects of the present invention are as follows:

[0055] (1) Comprehensiveness: The present invention calculates the degree of synergy of the technical path for each pollutant emission reduction and carbon emission reduction through a synergistic effect coefficient model, and obtains the synergistic effect coefficient of each type of pollution. This indicator can more intuitively reflect the synergistic emission reduction effect of the measures.

[0056] While other synergistic effect coefficients only evaluate a single pollutant, the present invention supports the synergistic evaluation of multiple pollutants (SO2, NOx, VOCs, etc.) and greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N2O) by calculating the synergistic control emission reduction equivalent;

[0057] This paper categorizes pollution reduction and carbon reduction indicators at the same level using an equivalent approach. This comprehensive approach helps to more comprehensively evaluate the pollution reduction and carbon reduction effects of technologies, providing policymakers and businesses with a more comprehensive basis for decision-making.

[0058] (2) Economic efficiency: This method can show whether a project can generate income while reducing pollution and carbon emissions, and can accurately calculate the investment and the number of years required to achieve a break-even point. The government can then make reasonable arrangements based on the economic efficiency of the project. By accurately estimating the cost of collaborative emission reduction, the present invention can provide businesses and policymakers with more economical and efficient emission reduction solutions. This helps reduce the operating costs of businesses, improves economic benefits, and also helps promote the in-depth implementation of pollution and carbon reduction efforts.

[0059] (3) Flexibility: Weight parameters can be adjusted according to industry and regional characteristics. This flexibility enables the present invention to adapt to different scenarios, improving its scope of application and practicality.

[0060] (4) Innovation: This invention introduces new technical means and methods in the field of pollution reduction and carbon reduction, such as the simultaneous consideration of the impact of multiple pollutants and the coordinated control strategy of multiple pollutants and carbon emissions. These innovations not only enhance the technological advancement of this invention but also provide new ideas and methods for promoting pollution reduction and carbon reduction.

[0061] (5) Practicality: This invention is not only innovative and advanced in theory, but also highly practical. Through practical application and verification, it has demonstrated good pollution reduction and carbon reduction effects and economic efficiency, providing strong support for promoting the construction of ecological civilization in my country and achieving a comprehensive green transformation of the economy and society. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0062] Figure 1 Detailed map of emission reduction equivalents for the coordinated control of pollution and carbon reduction in the automobile manufacturing industry demonstration project;

[0063] Figure 2 Detailed distribution of economic costs for unit carbon pollution reduction in the automobile manufacturing industry. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0064] In order to make the purpose, technical solutions and advantages of the present invention more clearly understood, the present invention is further described in detail below in conjunction with the embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are only used to explain the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention.

[0065] The present invention discloses a collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction, comprising the following steps:

[0066] S1. Calculate the synergy degree of technology pathways (such as technological transformation, operation optimization, energy-saving transformation, photovoltaic power generation, etc.) on multiple pollutants and carbon emissions through the synergy effect coefficient model;

[0067] The synergy effect coefficient model is as follows:

[0068]

[0069] Where:

[0070] R i -- Synergistic effect coefficient of emission reduction measure i (the setting of measures is based on technical paths such as energy-saving transformation, energy structure adjustment, process technology improvement, pollution control upgrade, and energy cleaning. Specific measures can be set according to the conditions of each industry; the setting method can refer to the specific measures in the example application of the automotive industry in the example);

[0071] RGHGs ——Weight coefficients of greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N2O). For specific values, refer to Table 1 below:

[0072] Table 1 Weight coefficient table

[0073]

[0074] Q i,j ——the amount of emission reduction of pollutant j achieved by emission reduction measure i;

[0075] β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, and μ are the equivalent weight coefficients of pollutants exceeding the standard (SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste). For specific values, please refer to Table 2 below (whether each pollutant indicator needs to be included should be based on a comprehensive consideration of the local environmental control situation and the regulations on exceeding the standard for pollutants. If the indicators have met the standards, the settings can be canceled. Taking Tianjin as an example, since SO2 has met the standards, this pollutant is not considered).

[0076] Table 2 Weight coefficient table

[0077]

[0078] n j - Pollutant weights are set based on local environmental control conditions, pollutant excess standards, and technical reduction targets;

[0079] Q i,c ——Reduction in greenhouse gas (CO2) emissions due to emission reduction measures i.

[0080] S2. Calculate the coordinated control emission reduction equivalent ER- based on the equivalent weight coefficient eq , pollutants and greenhouse gases in different media (air, water, solid waste) are comprehensively considered according to their weights, and the specific weights should be set according to their importance to the pollution of the environment.

[0081] ER- eq =∑Q GHGs ×R GHGs +R Ps ×∑(Q Ps ×n j ); (Formula 3);

[0082] Expanding formula 3, we get:

[0083] ER- eq =R GHGs ×α1Q CO2 +R GHGs ×α2Q CH4 +R GHGs ×α3Q N2O +RPs ×(n j ×βQ SO2 +n j ×γQ NOX +n j ×δQ VOCs +n j ×εQ NH3-N +n j ×ζQ COD +n j ×μQ 固废 ); (Formula 4)

[0084] Where:

[0085] ER- eq - Coordinated control of emission reduction equivalents;

[0086] R GHGs ——Greenhouse gas weight coefficient, for specific values, refer to Table 1;

[0087] R Ps ——Pollutant weight coefficient, for specific values, refer to Table 1;

[0088] Q GHGs - greenhouse gas emission reductions;

[0089] Q Ps — reduction in pollutant emissions;

[0090] n j ——weight value of pollutants;

[0091] α——Greenhouse gas (CO2, CH4, N2O) equivalent weight coefficient, refer to Table 2 for specific values;

[0092] β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, μ——equivalent weight coefficients of pollutants exceeding the standard (SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, solid waste). For specific values, please refer to Table 2 (whether each pollutant indicator needs to be included should be based on the local environmental control situation and the regulations on exceeding the standard of pollutants. If the indicators have met the standards, the settings can be cancelled. Taking Tianjin as an example, since SO2 has met the standards, this pollutant is not considered).

[0093] S3. Apply the economic cost model to calculate the cost of collaborative emission reduction (EC- eq ); the specific formula is as follows:

[0094] C=C I +n(C O -R V ); (Formula 5)

[0095] EC- eq =C / ER- eq; (Formula 6)

[0096] In formulas 5 and 6:

[0097] EC- eq - Collaborative emission reduction costs, which are the net costs per unit of collaborative emission reduction equivalent, i.e. the economic input required to achieve a certain emission reduction effect;

[0098] ER- eq -- Co-control Emission Reduction Equivalent, which represents the total reduction in emissions of multiple pollutants and carbon emissions achieved simultaneously during the implementation of pollution reduction and carbon reduction technologies;

[0099] C——the total economic investment required to implement the project, that is, the project investment cost C I Plus the operating cost C within a certain period of time o Minus profit value R V The value of

[0100] C I - Project investment cost, which is the sum of monetary expenditures of materialized and living labor expended on fixed asset investment projects;

[0101] C O - operating costs, which are expenses that must be paid during the implementation process;

[0102] R V ——Energy saving and efficiency improvement benefits;

[0103] From formulas 5 and 6, we can get:

[0104] When EC = 0, that is, when C = 0, the specific number of years n can be calculated, indicating that the operating costs and benefits will reach a balance within n years, that is, the cost balance of collaborative emission reduction;

[0105] When EC < 0, that is, when C < 0, the operating cost is less than the benefit value, indicating that the project has not only achieved the effect of reducing pollution and carbon emissions but also generated benefits within the n years of implementation;

[0106] When EC>0, that is, when C>0, the operating cost is greater than the benefit value, which means that the project has been investing funds without any benefits in order to achieve pollution reduction and carbon reduction effects during the n years of implementation.

[0107] Example 1

[0108] The specific implementation of this embodiment is mainly carried out according to the following steps:

[0109] (1) First, it is necessary to clarify the coordinated control objectives of multiple pollutants and carbon emissions. This includes determining the types of pollutants that need to be controlled, emission standards, and the expected emission reduction effects;

[0110] (2) Based on the determined collaborative control objectives, formulate corresponding collaborative control strategies. This includes selecting appropriate emission reduction technologies, optimizing the combination and implementation sequence of emission reduction measures, etc. At the same time, it is also necessary to consider the interactions and impacts between different pollutants to ensure the effectiveness and economy of the collaborative control strategy;

[0111] (3) According to formulas 2 to 6, calculate the synergistic emission reduction effect, investment cost, operating cost, and possible benefits of the project measures, and then derive the synergistic emission reduction cost. This step helps to assess the economic feasibility of the technology and provide a basis for subsequent decision-making;

[0112] (4) After implementing coordinated control measures, it is necessary to regularly monitor and evaluate the emission reduction effects. This includes collecting pollutant emission data, calculating emission reduction equivalents and synergistic effect coefficients, and analyzing economic benefits. Through monitoring and evaluation, problems can be discovered and adjusted in a timely manner to ensure the achievement of coordinated control goals.

[0113] (5) Demonstration and application of pollution reduction and carbon reduction technologies in the automotive industry

[0114] Taking the pollution reduction and carbon reduction project of the automobile manufacturing industry in Tianjin Economic and Technological Development Zone as an example, considering that among waste gas, wastewater and solid waste, waste gas has the most significant impact on the environment, it is given a weight of 0.8; while wastewater and solid waste are relatively lighter, they are both assigned a weight of 0.1. 2.5 As the key indicator of exceeding the standard, it is also the focus of control. NOx and VOCs are the core targets of emission reduction in Tianjin Economic Development Zone. Therefore, the weight of NOx is set at 0.3, the weight of VOCs is increased to 0.4, and the weight of PM is set at 0.3. 2.5 Maintained at 0.1;

[0115] Based on Model Formulas 2-6 of this invention, a collaborative assessment and pathway study of pollution reduction and carbon reduction projects was conducted at eight key enterprises in the automotive manufacturing sector of the Tianjin Economic-Technological Development Area. The assessment revealed that these eight enterprises implemented a total of 46 pollution reduction and carbon reduction projects, reducing CO2 emissions by approximately 310,000 tons, NOx emissions by 23 tons, VOCs emissions by 74 tons, and particulate matter emissions by 7 tons. Comparing the eight enterprises' carbon emissions, CO2 emissions decreased by nearly 40%, and pollutant emissions by approximately 10%-20%. Based on these assessment results, the project developed a set of collaborative pollution reduction and carbon reduction technologies for the automotive manufacturing sector (see Table 3).

[0116] Table 3: Technology set for pollution reduction and carbon reduction in the automobile manufacturing industry

[0117]

[0118]

[0119]

[0120] The new formula replaces the emission reductions of a single pollutant by introducing a total emission reduction equivalent calculated based on equivalent weight coefficients for different pollutants. This allows for a direct demonstration of the combined effectiveness of a technology in reducing pollution and carbon emissions. In the new formula, the unit carbon pollution reduction cost comprehensively considers the effectiveness and cost of emission reduction measures, fully reflecting the economic investment required to achieve unit carbon pollution reduction. Measures with lower unit carbon pollution reduction costs are more cost-effective and should be prioritized when selecting measures. Measures with higher unit pollutant reduction costs, on the other hand, are less cost-effective and should be prioritized accordingly.

[0121] Figure 1 A map of the coordinated emission reduction equivalents for pollution and carbon reduction in demonstration projects in the automobile manufacturing industry, showing the emission reduction equivalent values ​​and distribution of different projects in terms of coordinated emission reduction equivalents;

[0122] Collaborative control of emission reduction equivalent can comprehensively reflect the degree of pollution reduction and carbon reduction of the project, and the unit economic cost of pollution reduction and carbon reduction can better evaluate the relationship between the cost of project implementation, operating expenses and pollutants and carbon emissions.

[0123] A detailed analysis of concentrated projects reveals that green photovoltaic, energy-saving upgrades, and process transformation projects have similar slopes, with their distribution points essentially aligned on the same straight line. This trend is related to carbon and pollution accounting methods, demonstrating a shared synergistic trend in pollution reduction and carbon reduction. Gas substitution projects are located in the third quadrant, indicating that replacing steam with gas increases both carbon emissions and pollutant emissions. Electricity substitution projects are partially located in the first and second quadrants, reflecting the ratio of electricity to steam and the operating power consumption of equipment and facilities. The lower the amount of electricity used, the higher the project's synergy in pollution reduction and carbon reduction. Conversely, greater electricity consumption increases both pollutant and carbon emissions. Recycled water reuse and VOCs treatment projects are also located in the first quadrant, demonstrating high pollutant emission reduction equivalents but essentially zero carbon emission reduction equivalents. These projects exhibit low synergy in pollution reduction and carbon reduction, providing only single-sided pollution reduction, not synergistic carbon reduction. Waste heat utilization projects demonstrate a good degree of synergy in pollution reduction and carbon reduction, but this synergy varies significantly across projects, reflecting the extent of waste heat utilization and the degree of electricity and heat substitution.

[0124] Figure 2 This is a distribution map of the economic cost of unit carbon pollution reduction for demonstration projects in the automobile manufacturing industry, showing the distribution characteristics of the economic cost of unit carbon pollution reduction for each project.

[0125] from Figure 2It can be seen that the unit economic cost of pollution reduction and carbon reduction for photovoltaic projects is basically the same. Due to the different cooperation methods of different projects, there are small fluctuations in investment and operating costs. The investment in heat pump replacement, air conditioning gasification, and molding gasification is inversely proportional to pollution reduction and carbon reduction. The use of electricity and gas to replace the original steam only improves production stability and has no positive effect on pollution reduction and carbon reduction. The pollution reduction and carbon reduction synergy of the unit economic cost of the reclaimed water reuse and fresh air preheating projects is low, and the project investment has little impact on the effectiveness of pollution reduction and carbon reduction. Projects such as waste gas treatment facility renovation and energy-saving renovation have good economic benefits in pollution reduction and carbon reduction. Among them, the injection molding machine insulation renovation project can achieve a reduction of 1441.98 kg of equivalent carbon pollution for every 10,000 yuan. After energy-saving renovation, pollutant and carbon emissions can be greatly reduced.

[0126] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions and improvements made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included in the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: S1. Calculate the synergy of the technology path for multiple pollutants and carbon emissions using a synergy coefficient model, where the synergy coefficient is calculated based on the pollutant emission reduction, greenhouse gas emission reduction, and a preset weight coefficient; S2. Calculate the coordinated control emission reduction equivalent ER- based on the equivalent weight coefficient eq , the equivalent weight coefficient includes a greenhouse gas weight coefficient and a pollutant equivalent weight coefficient; S3, based on coordinated control emission reduction equivalent ER- eq , calculate the collaborative emission reduction cost EC- through the economic cost model eq The economic cost model includes project investment cost, operating cost and energy-saving and efficiency-enhancing benefits.

2. The collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction according to claim 1, characterized in that: The synergy coefficient model in S1 is as follows: Where: R i ——synergistic effect coefficient of emission reduction measure i; R GHGs ——Greenhouse gas weight coefficient, including the weight values ​​of CO2, CH4 and N2O; Q i,j ——the amount of emission reduction of pollutant j exceeding the standard achieved by emission reduction measure i; β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, and μ are the equivalent weight coefficients of pollutants exceeding the standard, including the equivalent weight values ​​of SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste; n j ——weight value of pollutants exceeding the standard; Q i,c ——Reduction in greenhouse gas (CO2) emissions due to emission reduction measures i.

3. The collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction according to claim 1, characterized in that: Coordinated control emission reduction equivalent ER- eq =∑Q GHGs ×R GHGs +R Ps ×∑(Q Ps ×n j ); (Formula 3); Expanding formula 3, we get: ER -eq = R GHGs × α1Q CO2 + R GHGs × α2Q CH4 + R GHGs × α3Q N2O + R Ps × (n j × βQ SO2 + n j × γQ NOX + n j × δQ VOCs + n j × εQ NH3-N + n j × ζQ COD + n j × μQ 固废 ); (Formula 4) Where: ER- eq - Coordinated control of emission reduction equivalents; R GHGs ——weight coefficients of greenhouse gases CO2, CH4 and N2O; R Ps ——Weight coefficients of pollutants exceeding the standard such as SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD and solid waste; Q GHGs - Greenhouse gas emission reductions, including CO2, CH4, and N2O; Q Ps ——Reduction in emissions of pollutants including SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste; n j ——Pollutants include weighted values ​​of SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste; α——equivalent weight coefficient of greenhouse gases CO2, CH4, and N2O; β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, and μ are the equivalent weight coefficients of the pollutants exceeding the standard, namely SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3-N, COD, and solid waste.

4. The collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction according to claim 1, wherein: The economic cost model in S3 is: C=C I +n(C O -R V ); (Formula 5) In the formula: C——the total economic investment required to implement the project, that is, the project investment cost C I Add the operating cost C in n years O Minus profit value R V The value of C I - Project investment cost, which is the sum of monetary expenditures of materialized and living labor expended on fixed asset investment projects; C O - operating costs, which are expenses that must be paid during the implementation process; R V ——Energy saving and efficiency improvement benefits; n——years.

5. The collaborative evaluation method for pollution reduction and carbon reduction according to claim 4, characterized in that: The collaborative emission reduction cost model in S3 is: EC -eq =C / ER -eq ; (Formula 6) Where: EC -eq - Collaborative emission reduction costs, which are the net costs per unit of collaborative emission reduction equivalent, i.e. the economic input required to achieve a certain emission reduction effect; ER -eq ——Synergistic control emission reduction equivalent refers to the total emission reduction of multiple pollutants and carbon emissions achieved simultaneously in the process of implementing pollution reduction and carbon reduction technologies.

Images