Method for optimizing carbon reduction path of enterprise based on synergy of CCER and energy saving technical transformation

Abstract

The application provides an enterprise carbon reduction path optimization method based on CCER and energy saving technical improvement cooperation, relates to the technical field of energy saving and emission reduction, and comprises the following steps: acquiring a carbon quota gap of an enterprise; acquiring project data of each alternative energy saving technical improvement project and CCER project; determining an influence relationship of each alternative energy saving technical improvement project on an energy structure of the enterprise; based on the influence relationship, combining the carbon quota gap and the project data, constructing a plurality of candidate carbon reduction paths, and each candidate carbon reduction path comprising an implementation sequence of the energy saving technical improvement project; and optimizing and solving the candidate carbon reduction paths to determine a target carbon reduction path. The application converts an enterprise emission reduction path from a static project set into a dynamic state evolution process, predicts changes in emission reduction potential of subsequent projects by simulating changes in the energy structure of the enterprise caused by previous projects, and thus finds a globally optimal implementation sequence.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of energy conservation and emission reduction technology, and in particular to a method for optimizing enterprise carbon reduction pathways based on the synergy between CCER and energy-saving technological transformation. Background Technology

[0002] Carbon emission quota management limits a company's total greenhouse gas emissions by allocating annual carbon emission quotas. When a company's actual carbon emissions exceed its quota, it must make up the shortfall by implementing energy-saving technological upgrades or purchasing carbon emission rights; otherwise, it will face penalties such as production restrictions. Companies primarily achieve carbon reduction through energy-saving technological upgrade projects, such as heat recovery technology, motor frequency conversion technology, and process optimization technology, to reduce energy consumption in the production process. In addition, companies can also offset their own carbon emissions by purchasing carbon reductions generated through the China Certified Emission Reduction (CCER) program. Energy-saving technological upgrades and CCER projects are the two main ways for companies to make up for carbon quota shortfalls.

[0003] Existing corporate carbon reduction pathway planning methods typically select a combination of projects that meet both emission reduction requirements and economic viability based on the annual emission reduction and implementation costs of each energy-saving technological upgrade project, as well as the unit offset and market price of CCER projects. During the planning process, each project is treated as an independent emission reduction unit, and the overall emission reduction effect of the combined scheme is evaluated by summing the emission reductions of each project.

[0004] However, existing technologies, when constructing carbon reduction pathways, do not consider the interrelationships between energy-saving technological upgrading projects. In practice, the implementation of preceding energy-saving technological upgrading projects alters a company's energy flow and energy structure, thereby affecting the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects. Therefore, different project implementation sequences can lead to different total emission reduction effects from the same project combination. Because existing technologies ignore the impact of implementation sequence on emission reduction effects and only optimize combinations based on the emission reduction of the projects themselves, the selected carbon reduction pathway may, in actual implementation, suffer from an inappropriate implementation sequence, causing a significant decrease in the emission reduction potential of subsequent projects, and the total emission reduction failing to meet planning expectations, thus affecting the company's ability to compensate for carbon quota gaps. Summary of the Invention

[0005] This application provides a method for optimizing corporate carbon reduction pathways based on the synergy between CCER and energy-saving technological transformation, in order to address the issue of how to consider the impact of the implementation sequence on emission reduction effects in the combined optimization of multiple energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0006] The method for optimizing corporate carbon reduction pathways based on the synergy between CCER and energy-saving technological transformation provided in this application includes: obtaining the carbon quota gap of enterprises;

[0007] Obtain project data for each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project and CCER project;

[0008] Determine the impact of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project on the company's energy structure;

[0009] Based on the aforementioned impact relationships, combined with the carbon quota deficit and the project data, multiple candidate carbon reduction paths are constructed, each of which includes the implementation sequence of energy-saving technological upgrading projects.

[0010] The candidate carbon reduction paths are optimized and solved to determine the target carbon reduction path.

[0011] Optionally, in one possible implementation, determining the impact of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project on the enterprise's energy structure includes:

[0012] To determine the key aspects of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project;

[0013] Obtain the enterprise's energy flow relationship, which represents the upstream and downstream relationship between various energy links;

[0014] Based on the aforementioned action links and the energy flow relationship, identify energy-saving technological transformation projects that affect the upstream links and those that affect the downstream links;

[0015] For energy-saving technological upgrading projects that affect upstream and downstream processes, determine how energy-saving technological upgrading projects that affect upstream processes change the enterprise's energy structure.

[0016] The manner of change is taken as the influence relationship.

[0017] Optionally, in one possible implementation, the step of obtaining the roles of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project includes:

[0018] Obtain the equipment modification scope and process flow application scope of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project;

[0019] Map the scope of equipment modification and the scope of the process flow to the energy flow relationship;

[0020] Extract the energy node corresponding to the mapping, and use it as the functional link.

[0021] Optionally, in one possible implementation, based on the aforementioned impact relationship, and in conjunction with the carbon quota deficit and the project data, multiple candidate carbon reduction pathways are constructed, including:

[0022] Select at least one energy-saving technological upgrading project from each of the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects to form a project portfolio;

[0023] For each energy-saving technological upgrading project in the project portfolio, the changes in the emission reduction effect of each energy-saving technological upgrading project under different implementation sequences are deduced based on the influence relationship.

[0024] Identify the implementation sequence that maximizes the cumulative emission reductions of the project portfolio as the preferred implementation sequence;

[0025] The remaining emission deficit is obtained by comparing the cumulative emission reduction with the carbon quota deficit.

[0026] The number of CCER projects is determined based on the remaining gap.

[0027] The preferred implementation sequence, the project combination, and the number of CCER projects are combined to form a candidate carbon reduction path.

[0028] Optionally, in one possible implementation, the step of deducing the changes in emission reduction effects of each energy-saving technological upgrading project under different implementation sequences based on the influence relationship for each energy-saving technological upgrading project in the project portfolio includes:

[0029] Two implementation sequences are selected as comparison sequences from the different implementation sequences.

[0030] For the first implementation sequence in the comparison sequence, the first change to the enterprise's energy structure is simulated based on the change method;

[0031] Based on the first change, the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the changed corporate energy structure is evaluated to obtain the first emission reduction potential.

[0032] For the second implementation order in the comparison sequence, the second change to the enterprise's energy structure is simulated based on the change method;

[0033] Based on the second change, the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the changed corporate energy structure is evaluated to obtain the second emission reduction potential.

[0034] By comparing the first emission reduction potential with the second emission reduction potential, the change in the emission reduction effect is determined.

[0035] Optionally, in one possible implementation, selecting at least one energy-saving technological upgrading project from the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects to form a project portfolio includes:

[0036] Obtain the target identification of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project;

[0037] Identify energy-saving technological upgrading projects where the target objects overlap;

[0038] For the aforementioned energy-saving technological upgrading projects, determine whether the two energy-saving technological upgrading projects can be implemented simultaneously;

[0039] If they cannot be implemented simultaneously, the energy-saving technological upgrading projects shall be marked as exclusive project pairs.

[0040] When constructing the project portfolio, avoid including two energy-saving technological upgrading projects from the exclusive project pair into the same project portfolio at the same time.

[0041] Optionally, in one possible implementation, determining whether two energy-saving technological upgrading projects can be implemented simultaneously includes:

[0042] Obtain the implementation periods for each of the two energy-saving technological upgrading projects;

[0043] Determine whether the implementation periods overlap;

[0044] If the implementation periods overlap and the target identifiers of the two energy-saving technological transformation projects overlap, it is determined that the two energy-saving technological transformation projects cannot be implemented simultaneously.

[0045] If the implementation periods do not overlap, or the target identifiers of the two energy-saving technological transformation projects do not overlap, it is determined that the two energy-saving technological transformation projects can be implemented simultaneously.

[0046] Optionally, in one possible implementation, the optimization solution for the candidate carbon reduction pathway includes:

[0047] For each candidate carbon reduction path, the evolution of corporate carbon emissions during the implementation of the candidate carbon reduction path is simulated at multiple time stages;

[0048] At each time period, obtain the emission reductions generated by the energy-saving technological upgrading projects that have been implemented and completed;

[0049] Obtain the emission limits of the enterprise at each time period;

[0050] Identify the time period during which the emission reductions cannot enable the enterprise to meet the emission limits;

[0051] The number of identified time periods will be used as a path compliance indicator for the candidate carbon reduction pathways.

[0052] A constrained optimization model is constructed, which aims to minimize the total energy consumption of the selected candidate carbon reduction paths and uses the path compliance index as a constraint.

[0053] Solve the constrained optimization model.

[0054] Optionally, in one possible implementation, identifying the time period during which the emission reductions cannot enable the enterprise to meet the emission limits includes:

[0055] Obtain the total annual carbon emissions for the specified time period;

[0056] The actual emissions for the time period are obtained by deducting the emission reductions generated by the energy-saving technological upgrading projects that have been implemented and completed.

[0057] Compare the actual emissions with the emission limits corresponding to the time period;

[0058] If the actual emissions exceed the emission limit, the time period is identified as a period of insufficient emission reduction.

[0059] Optionally, in one possible implementation, determining the target carbon reduction pathway includes:

[0060] Extract the candidate carbon reduction paths that are selected from the optimization results;

[0061] Extract the implementation sequence of energy-saving technological upgrading projects and the number of CCER projects from the selected candidate carbon reduction pathways;

[0062] Construct path monitoring rules to obtain the actual emission reduction of each energy-saving technological transformation project during path execution;

[0063] Compare the actual emission reduction with the annual emission reduction of the corresponding energy-saving technological transformation projects in the selected candidate carbon reduction paths;

[0064] If the actual emission reduction is lower than the annual emission reduction, the emission reduction potential of the non-energy-saving technological transformation projects will be reassessed based on the energy-saving technological transformation projects that have been implemented and completed.

[0065] The implementation sequence of projects that have not yet undergone energy-saving technological upgrades will be adjusted based on the reassessed emission reduction potential, resulting in a revised implementation plan;

[0066] The adjusted implementation plan is taken as the target carbon reduction path.

[0067] Optionally, in one possible implementation, the reassessment of the emission reduction potential of projects that have not undergone energy-saving technological upgrades based on completed energy-saving technological upgrade projects includes:

[0068] Obtain information on how completed energy-saving technological upgrades have changed the company's energy structure;

[0069] The energy flow relationship is updated based on the aforementioned change method;

[0070] The impact of unimplemented energy-saving technological upgrades on the company's energy structure has been redefined based on the updated energy flow relationship.

[0071] The emission reduction potential of projects that have not implemented energy-saving technological upgrades is calculated based on the redefined impact relationships.

[0072] Optionally, in one possible implementation, obtaining project data for each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project and CCER project includes:

[0073] Acquire multiple initial energy-saving technological upgrading projects;

[0074] Obtain the industry type of the enterprise;

[0075] Based on the industry type, initial energy-saving technological transformation projects that match the industry type of the enterprise are selected as candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects;

[0076] Obtain the energy consumption input and annual emission reduction of the selected energy-saving technological upgrading projects;

[0077] Obtain multiple alternative CCER projects;

[0078] Based on the approval status of the candidate CCER projects, candidate CCER projects with an approval status of "filed" or "issued" are selected.

[0079] Obtain the unit energy consumption input and unit offset of the selected candidate CCER projects.

[0080] Optionally, in one possible implementation, obtaining the enterprise's carbon allowance deficit includes:

[0081] Obtain the emission data and quota data of the enterprise within a preset time period;

[0082] An emission prediction function is obtained by fitting the emission data;

[0083] A quota prediction function is obtained by fitting the quota data;

[0084] Substitute the emission prediction function into the current year to obtain the total annual carbon emissions;

[0085] Substitute the quota prediction function into the current year to obtain the annual carbon quota allocation;

[0086] The carbon quota gap is determined based on the total annual carbon emissions and the annual carbon quota allocation.

[0087] Optionally, in one possible implementation, for the first implementation sequence in the comparison sequence, the first change to the enterprise's energy structure caused by the preceding energy-saving technological transformation project is simulated based on the change method, including:

[0088] Identify the effective time of the changes in the enterprise's energy structure caused by the preceding energy-saving technological transformation project in the time dimension;

[0089] For subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects that were already in operation before the effective time, determine the emission reduction losses generated by the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the enterprise's energy structure before the change.

[0090] The emission reduction loss is marked as a sequence-dependent loss that cannot be traced back and compensated;

[0091] When assessing the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects under the changed corporate energy structure, the sequence dependency loss is deducted.

[0092] Optionally, in one possible implementation, the assessment of the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects under the changed enterprise energy structure includes:

[0093] Based on the changed enterprise energy structure, the baseline operating environment for subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects is determined.

[0094] The baseline state of the operating environment is used as the design input condition for the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation project.

[0095] Based on the aforementioned design input conditions, re-evaluate the equipment selection parameters and process configuration parameters of the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation project under the baseline operating environment conditions;

[0096] The emission reduction potential of the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation project is calculated based on the re-evaluated equipment selection parameters and process configuration parameters.

[0097] The enterprise carbon reduction pathway optimization method based on the synergy of CCER and energy-saving technological transformation provided in this application has the following beneficial effects:

[0098] 1. By determining the impact of each alternative energy-saving technological transformation project on the enterprise's energy structure, and based on the impact relationship, deducing the changes in the emission reduction effect of each energy-saving technological transformation project under different implementation sequences, this application identifies path combinations that lead to a significant decrease in emission reduction effect due to incorrect implementation sequence during the planning stage. This avoids selecting a scheme that seems optimal, but whose emission reduction potential is diminished in actual implementation due to the adverse changes to the energy structure caused by the preceding projects. In this way, the planned path achieves the expected emission reduction effect.

[0099] 2. This application simulates how preceding projects change a company’s energy structure and reassesses the emission reduction potential of subsequent projects under the changed state. It identifies projects with low emission reduction when assessed individually, but which will improve the energy structure and significantly increase the emission reduction potential of subsequent projects. This allows for the discovery of project combinations and implementation sequences with higher total emission reduction.

[0100] 3. This application obtains the changes that completed projects have made to the enterprise's energy structure during the path execution process, and reassesses the emission reduction potential of unimplemented projects and adjusts the implementation sequence based on the changes, so that the carbon reduction path has the ability to adapt to execution deviations, thereby improving the reliability of achieving emission reduction targets. Attached Figure Description

[0101] Figure 1 This is an overall flowchart of the enterprise carbon reduction path optimization method based on the synergy of CCER and energy-saving technological transformation provided in the embodiments of this application;

[0102] Figure 2 This is an application environment diagram of the enterprise carbon reduction path optimization method based on the synergy of CCER and energy-saving technological transformation provided in the embodiments of this application;

[0103] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the hardware structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0104] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of this application clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of this application, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of this application, all other embodiments obtained by those of ordinary skill in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this application.

[0105] The technical solutions of this application will be described in detail below with specific embodiments. These specific embodiments can be combined with each other, and the same or similar concepts or processes may not be described again in some embodiments.

[0106] To address the issue of how to consider the impact of project implementation sequence on emission reduction effectiveness in the combination and optimization of multiple energy-saving technological transformation projects in existing carbon reduction scheme formulation, this application proposes a corporate carbon reduction path optimization method based on the synergy of CCER and energy-saving technological transformation, such as... Figure 1 As shown, the process includes: obtaining the carbon quota deficit of enterprises; obtaining project data for each candidate energy-saving technological transformation project and CCER project; determining the impact of each candidate energy-saving technological transformation project on the enterprise's energy structure; based on the impact relationship, combined with the carbon quota deficit and project data, constructing multiple candidate carbon reduction paths, each candidate carbon reduction path including the implementation sequence of energy-saving technological transformation projects; optimizing the candidate carbon reduction paths to determine the target carbon reduction path.

[0107] The enterprise carbon reduction pathway optimization method based on the synergy of CCER and energy-saving technological transformation provided in this application embodiment can be applied to, for example... Figure 2In the application environment shown, the enterprise management terminal 102 communicates with the carbon reduction planning server 104 via a network. The data storage system 106 stores historical carbon emission data, historical carbon quota allocation data, a parameter library for candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects, a CCER project information library, and optimization model configuration parameters that the carbon reduction planning server 104 needs to process. The data storage system 106 can be integrated into the carbon reduction planning server 104 or deployed on a cloud platform or distributed storage system. The external data interface 108 connects to the carbon reduction planning server 104 via a network to interface with external platforms such as the National Carbon Emission Rights Registration System, the National Certified Emission Reduction (CCER) Registration System, and carbon trading platforms to obtain external data such as carbon quota allocation documents, CCER project approval status, and carbon market prices. The project management terminal 110 connects to the carbon reduction planning server 104 via a network and is used by energy-saving technological upgrading project managers to input project technical parameters, query project evaluation results, and receive optimized project implementation suggestions.

[0108] Step 100: Obtain the carbon allowance shortfall for the enterprise.

[0109] In some embodiments, step 100 may be implemented in a manner that includes steps 110 to 160:

[0110] Step 110: Obtain the enterprise's emission data and quota data within the preset time period.

[0111] The preset time period is a continuous period of the company's historical operations. In this embodiment, the preset time period is selected as a historical period of the past 3 to 5 years to ensure that there is sufficient data to support the subsequent fitting analysis.

[0112] It should be noted that emissions data includes the actual carbon emissions of enterprises each year within the preset period. This data is collected through the enterprise's carbon emissions monitoring system and can be either values ​​recorded by online monitoring equipment or statistical data regularly reported by the enterprise to the relevant government department. Quota data includes the amount of carbon quotas allocated to the enterprise each year within the preset period. This data is obtained through the carbon trading market management platform or quota allocation documents issued by the government department.

[0113] Step 120: Obtain the emission prediction function by fitting the emission data.

[0114] Specifically, time series analysis is used to fit the emission data. The years within a preset time period are used as independent variables, and the actual carbon emissions for those years are used as the dependent variable. An emission prediction function is then established through regression analysis. The regression analysis method can be linear regression, for example, when enterprise emissions show a stable upward or downward trend; or it can be multinomial regression, for example, when enterprise emissions fluctuate significantly or have inflection points, using quadratic or cubic multinomial regression.

[0115] The emission prediction function describes the functional relationship between a year and carbon emissions. During the fitting process, a goodness-of-fit index is calculated. This index measures how well the emission prediction function fits historical data. When the goodness-of-fit index is greater than a preset goodness-of-fit threshold, the emission prediction function is considered to have sufficient predictive accuracy. In this embodiment, the preset goodness-of-fit threshold can be 0.85, for example, a goodness-of-fit index of 0.87 is sufficient. It can also be 0.80 or 0.90, depending on the company's required prediction accuracy.

[0116] Step 130: Obtain the quota prediction function by fitting the quota data.

[0117] The quota data is processed using the same fitting method as in step 120. A quota prediction function is established by using the year within a preset time period as the independent variable and the corresponding carbon quota allocation as the dependent variable. This quota prediction function describes the functional relationship between the year and the carbon quota allocation.

[0118] Step 140: Substitute the emission prediction function into the current year to obtain the total annual carbon emissions.

[0119] The current year's value is substituted into the emission prediction function as the independent variable, and the total annual carbon emissions for the current year are calculated using the emission prediction function.

[0120] Step 150: Substitute the quota prediction function into the current year to obtain the annual carbon quota allocation.

[0121] The current year's value is substituted into the quota prediction function as the independent variable, and the annual carbon quota allocation for the current year is calculated using the quota prediction function. The annual carbon quota allocation reflects the carbon quota that a company expects to obtain in the current year.

[0122] Step 150: Substitute the quota prediction function into the current year to obtain the annual carbon quota allocation.

[0123] Step 160: Determine the carbon allowance gap based on the total annual carbon emissions and the annual carbon allowance allocation.

[0124] It is easy to understand that the carbon quota gap is the starting point for enterprises to formulate carbon reduction paths. Only by clarifying the size of the gap can energy-saving technological transformation projects and CCER projects be rationally allocated.

[0125] Specifically, this involves comparing the total annual carbon emissions with the annual carbon allowance allocation. When the total annual carbon emissions exceed the annual carbon allowance allocation, the difference is the carbon allowance gap, which represents the shortfall that companies need to make up through energy conservation and emission reduction or by purchasing carbon allowances.

[0126] When the total annual carbon emissions are less than or equal to the annual carbon allowance allocation, the carbon allowance gap is zero, indicating that the company's current carbon allowance allocation is sufficient to meet its emission requirements, and no additional carbon reduction measures are needed. The carbon allowance gap provides a quantitative target for subsequently constructing candidate carbon reduction pathways.

[0127] Step 200: Obtain project data for each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project and CCER project.

[0128] In some embodiments, step 200 may be specifically implemented in steps 210 to 270:

[0129] Step 210: Obtain multiple initial energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0130] The initial energy-saving technological upgrading projects are energy-saving technological transformation solutions available for enterprises to choose from. These projects are obtained from an energy-saving technological upgrading project database, which may be an energy-saving technology promotion catalog published by national or local energy management departments, an energy-saving technology database established by industry associations or professional institutions, or a database of historical technological upgrading projects accumulated by the enterprise itself.

[0131] Step 220: Obtain the industry type of the enterprise.

[0132] A company's industry type is determined through its business license or industry classification standards. Industry types can include steel, chemicals, building materials, power, etc. For example, if a company is a cement producer, its industry type is building materials.

[0133] Step 230: Select initial energy-saving technological transformation projects that match the industry type of the enterprise based on industry type, as candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0134] It should be noted that different industries have different energy consumption characteristics and processes. If all initial energy-saving technological transformation projects are directly used as alternatives, some projects may not be suitable for the target enterprise, thereby reducing the efficiency of the enterprise's carbon reduction path optimization.

[0135] Understandably, matching projects by industry type allows for the quick elimination of unsuitable technological upgrading projects. For example, blast furnace waste heat recovery technology for the steel industry is not suitable for the chemical industry, and clinker calcination optimization technology for the cement industry is not suitable for the power industry.

[0136] Specifically, the applicable industry identifiers of the initial energy-saving technological transformation projects are compared with the industry type of the enterprise. Initial energy-saving technological transformation projects whose applicable industry identifiers include the industry type of the enterprise are selected, and these selected initial energy-saving technological transformation projects are used as candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0137] Step 240: Obtain the energy consumption input and annual emission reduction of the candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0138] The energy input amount refers to the financial investment required to implement the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects, which is obtained from the technical data or historical implementation cases of the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects. The annual emission reduction amount refers to the carbon emission reduction that can be achieved each year after the implementation of the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects, which is obtained through technical assessment reports or measured data.

[0139] Step 250: Obtain multiple alternative CCER projects.

[0140] Among them, the candidate CCER projects are China's certified voluntary emission reduction projects. Candidate CCER projects are obtained from the carbon trading market platform or the CCER project registration system. Candidate CCER projects can include wind power projects, photovoltaic projects, forestry carbon sink projects, methane recovery and utilization projects, etc.

[0141] Step 260: Filter out candidate CCER projects with an approval status of "filed" or "issued" based on the approval status of the candidate CCER projects.

[0142] It should be noted that CCER projects go through multiple approval stages from application to final use for offsetting carbon emissions, including filing, review, verification, and issuance. CCER projects in the early approval stages are at risk of approval failure or issuance delays and are not suitable as a reliable source of offsets in a company's carbon reduction path.

[0143] It is easy to understand that only candidate CCER projects with an approval status of "registered" or "issued" have a definite availability. "Registered" means that the CCER project has passed the review of the competent authority and completed the registration, while "issued" means that the emission reductions generated by the CCER project have been verified and issued as tradable CCER quotas.

[0144] Specifically, obtain the approval status information of candidate CCER projects, filter out candidate CCER projects with the approval status marked as filed or issued, and exclude CCER projects that are in the application stage or under review and have not yet completed the approval process.

[0145] Step 270: Obtain the unit energy input and unit offset of the selected candidate CCER projects.

[0146] The unit energy input refers to the total resource input required to obtain a unit of CCER project quota. The unit energy input is determined through the technical parameters and resource consumption data of the candidate CCER projects. It is used to measure the differences in resource consumption among different candidate CCER projects to achieve the same offsetting effect. The unit offset is the amount of carbon emissions that a unit of candidate CCER project quota can offset. According to the verification standards of candidate CCER projects, the unit offset is typically 1 ton of CO2 equivalent.

[0147] For example, for wind power CCER candidate projects and forestry carbon sink CCER candidate projects, the unit energy input required to obtain the same offset amount differs due to the different project types. The unit energy input of wind power CCER candidate projects may be lower than that of forestry carbon sink CCER candidate projects.

[0148] Step 300: Determine the impact of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project on the company's energy structure.

[0149] It is important to note that traditional methods for evaluating energy-saving technological upgrade projects typically treat each project as an independent emission reduction unit, neglecting the physical coupling relationships between different stages of a company's energy system. However, in actual industrial production, the energy quality and supply status output from upstream stages are transmitted downstream along the energy flow path, thus affecting the operating efficiency and emission reduction potential of equipment in subsequent stages. For example, in steel companies, blast furnace gas produced in the ironmaking stage is the main energy source for the heating furnaces in the rolling mill stage. If gas recovery upgrades are implemented in the ironmaking stage to increase the calorific value of the gas, the effective heat that can be recovered by the waste heat utilization device in the rolling mill stage will increase accordingly. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the position of candidate energy-saving technological upgrade projects within the company's energy system and determine their impact on the company's energy structure.

[0150] In some embodiments, step 300 may be specifically implemented as steps 310 to 350:

[0151] Step 310: Obtain the role of each candidate energy-saving technological transformation project.

[0152] The "functioning link" refers to the energy node location in the enterprise's energy system where the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project plays a role. The functioning link identifies the specific energy link that the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project will modify or optimize, such as the ironmaking process, steel rolling process, or power supply process.

[0153] Furthermore, step 310 specifically includes steps 311 to 313:

[0154] Step 311: Obtain the equipment modification scope and process flow scope of each candidate energy-saving technological transformation project.

[0155] The scope of equipment modification refers to the list of equipment to be modified or replaced in the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects. The scope of process flow refers to the process flow steps to be optimized or adjusted in the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects.

[0156] Understandably, the technical proposals or feasibility study reports for potential energy-saving technological upgrade projects typically clearly list the equipment to be modified and the involved processes. For example, the equipment modification scope of a blast furnace gas recovery system upgrade project includes gas residual pressure turbine generator sets, gas purification devices, etc., and the process scope covers the entire process from the blast furnace taphole to the gas pipeline. The equipment modification scope of a steel rolling heating furnace waste heat utilization device project includes waste heat boilers, heat exchangers, etc., and the process scope covers the heating furnace flue gas emission stage.

[0157] Step 312: Map the scope of equipment modification and the scope of process flow to the energy flow relationship.

[0158] Specifically, based on the physical location of the equipment within the enterprise's energy system and the location of the process flow within the enterprise's production process, a mapping relationship is established between the candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects and the corresponding nodes in the energy flow relationship.

[0159] For example, when the equipment modification scope of a candidate energy-saving technological transformation project includes a blast furnace gas purification device and the process flow scope includes the gas recovery process in the ironmaking stage, the candidate energy-saving technological transformation project is mapped to the gas production node corresponding to the ironmaking stage in the energy flow relationship.

[0160] Step 313: Extract the energy node corresponding to the mapping as the action link.

[0161] Extract energy nodes that establish a mapping relationship with candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects from the energy flow relationship, and mark the extracted energy nodes as the link in the candidate energy-saving technological transformation project.

[0162] Preferably, in step 313, when the equipment modification scope or process flow scope of a candidate energy-saving technological transformation project involves multiple energy nodes, all involved energy nodes are extracted as the set of the action links of the candidate energy-saving technological transformation project, and the set of action links is used to subsequently determine the impact scope of the candidate energy-saving technological transformation project.

[0163] Step 320: Obtain the enterprise's energy flow relationship, which represents the upstream and downstream relationship between various energy links.

[0164] Energy flow relationships refer to the flow paths of energy within an enterprise from production and conversion to consumption, and the connections between each stage. These relationships are obtained through the enterprise's energy system topology diagram or energy balance sheet.

[0165] It's easy to understand that a company's energy system typically exhibits a coupled structure, either series or parallel. For example, in a steel company, blast furnace gas produced in the ironmaking process is purified and then transported to the heating furnace in the rolling mill as fuel, forming a series energy flow relationship from ironmaking to rolling. In a chemical company, steam pipelines supply steam to multiple production workshops in parallel, forming a parallel energy flow relationship from the steam supply link to each production link.

[0166] The upstream and downstream relationship in energy flow is defined as follows: if the energy produced or output by energy link A is used as the input or consumption object of energy link B, then energy link A is the upstream link and energy link B is the downstream link.

[0167] Step 330: Based on the relationship between the action links and energy flow, identify energy-saving technological transformation projects that affect the upstream links and those that affect the downstream links.

[0168] Specifically, the position of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project's impact stage within the energy flow relationship is marked. For any two candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects, the relative positions of their impact stages within the energy flow relationship are compared. When the impact stage of the first candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project is upstream of the impact stage of the second candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project, the first candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project is identified as an energy-saving technological upgrading project impacting the upstream stage, and the second candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project is identified as an energy-saving technological upgrading project impacting the downstream stage.

[0169] For example, in the energy flow relationships of steel enterprises, the blast furnace gas recovery system renovation project in the ironmaking stage affects the ironmaking stage, while the heating furnace waste heat utilization device project in the rolling mill stage affects the rolling mill stage. Since the blast furnace gas produced in the ironmaking stage is transported to the rolling mill stage as fuel, the ironmaking stage is located upstream of the rolling mill stage. Therefore, the blast furnace gas recovery system renovation project is identified as an energy-saving technological renovation project affecting the upstream stage, while the heating furnace waste heat utilization device project is identified as an energy-saving technological renovation project affecting the downstream stage.

[0170] Step 340: For energy-saving technological transformation projects that affect the upstream and downstream sectors, determine how the energy-saving technological transformation projects that affect the upstream sector change the company's energy structure.

[0171] It should be noted that energy-saving technological upgrading projects that affect the upstream links will change the quality characteristics or supply status of the energy output from the upstream links after implementation, and this change will be transmitted to the downstream links along the energy flow relationship, thereby affecting the operating environment of the energy-saving technological upgrading projects that affect the downstream links.

[0172] Understandably, the mode of change is a key variable in characterizing the impact of preceding projects on a company's energy structure. This mode of change includes variations in energy quality parameters, changes in energy supply stability, and changes in energy consumption intensity.

[0173] Specifically, for energy-saving technological upgrading projects affecting upstream processes, the impact of their technical solutions on the energy output of upstream processes is analyzed. For example, the blast furnace gas recovery system renovation project, by adding gas purification devices and optimizing the recovery process, can increase the calorific value of the output blast furnace gas and reduce the impurity content. The changes are manifested in the calorific value of the blast furnace gas increasing from 3600 kJ per standard cubic meter before the renovation to 4200 kJ per standard cubic meter after the renovation, as well as the reduction in tar and dust content in the blast furnace gas.

[0174] For energy-saving technological upgrading projects affecting downstream processes, this paper analyzes the dependence of their emission reduction effects on the quality of energy output from upstream processes. For example, a waste heat recovery device for a steel rolling mill heating furnace recovers heat from the furnace flue gas through a waste heat boiler. The effective heat that can be recovered depends on the temperature and calorific value of the flue gas after fuel combustion, which are directly affected by the calorific value of the fuel. When the calorific value of the blast furnace gas in the upstream process increases, the temperature of the flue gas produced by burning this gas in the heating furnace rises, and the heat that the waste heat recovery device can recover increases accordingly.

[0175] Energy-saving technological upgrading projects that affect upstream processes can be used as a means of transformation to address changes in energy quality and supply status within an enterprise's energy structure.

[0176] Step 350: Treat the change in method as an influence relationship.

[0177] The identified changes are identified as the impact relationships between upstream energy-saving technological upgrading projects and downstream energy-saving technological upgrading projects. These impact relationships establish state dependencies between preceding and subsequent projects, facilitating the deduction of emission reduction effects of each energy-saving technological upgrading project under different implementation sequences.

[0178] For example, the impact of the blast furnace gas recovery system retrofit project on the heating furnace waste heat utilization device project is as follows: the increased calorific value of the blast furnace gas leads to an increase in the temperature of the heating furnace flue gas, thereby enhancing the heat recovery capacity of the waste heat utilization device. This relationship indicates that the emission reduction potential of the heating furnace waste heat utilization device project is a function of the completion status of the blast furnace gas recovery system retrofit project, rather than a fixed constant.

[0179] Preferably, in step 300, when determining the method of change, the degree of impact of the change on the enterprise's energy structure can also be quantified. The degree of impact is determined by calculating the magnitude of change in the energy quality parameters involved in the change. For example, if the calorific value of blast furnace gas increases from 3600 kJ per standard cubic meter to 4200 kJ per standard cubic meter, the increase in calorific value is 16.7%, and this increase in calorific value is used as a quantitative indicator of the degree of impact.

[0180] Step 400: Based on the impact relationship, combined with the carbon quota gap and project data, construct multiple candidate carbon reduction paths, each of which includes the implementation sequence of energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0181] It should be noted that traditional methods treat each energy-saving technological transformation project as an independent emission reduction unit when constructing carbon reduction pathways. They assess the overall emission reduction effect by simply summarizing and superimposing the annual emission reduction of each project, assuming that the emission reduction of each project is an additivity independent variable and that the order of project implementation does not affect the final emission reduction effect. However, they ignore the physical coupling relationship between the various links in the enterprise's energy system.

[0182] It is understandable that a company's carbon reduction path is essentially an orderly evolutionary process rather than a simple collection of projects. The implementation of preceding energy-saving technological upgrades alters the company's energy structure, and this change propagates downstream along energy flow relationships, thus affecting the operating environment and emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrades. Therefore, the order in which energy-saving technological upgrades are implemented directly determines the actual emission reduction effect of each project under different energy structure states.

[0183] In some embodiments, step 400 may be specifically implemented in steps 410 to 460:

[0184] Step 410: Select at least one energy-saving technological transformation project from the candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects to form a project portfolio.

[0185] The project portfolio is a collection of multiple energy-saving technological upgrading projects selected from the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects. The project portfolio constitutes a set of technical solutions for achieving emission reduction targets in the candidate carbon reduction pathways.

[0186] Specifically, step 410 includes steps 411 to 415:

[0187] Step 411: Obtain the target identification of each candidate energy-saving technological transformation project.

[0188] The target of action is the specific equipment or process to be modified or optimized in the candidate energy-saving technological transformation project, which can be extracted from the technical solution documents of the candidate energy-saving technological transformation project.

[0189] Step 412: Identify pairs of energy-saving technological transformation projects with overlapping target identifiers.

[0190] Specifically, the target identification of each candidate energy-saving technological transformation project is compared. When the target identification of two candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects points to the same equipment or the same part of the same process flow, it is considered that the target identification of the two candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects overlaps, and these two candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects are marked as a pair of energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0191] Step 413: For the energy-saving technological transformation project pair, determine whether the two energy-saving technological transformation projects can be implemented simultaneously.

[0192] It should be noted that when the target objects of two energy-saving technological transformation projects overlap, there may be physical conflicts or resource competition, which may prevent the two energy-saving technological transformation projects from being implemented in parallel at the same time.

[0193] Furthermore, step 413 includes steps 413a to 413d:

[0194] Step 413a: Obtain the implementation period of each of the two energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0195] Step 413b: Determine if there is any overlap in the implementation time periods.

[0196] Compare whether the implementation periods of two energy-saving technological transformation projects overlap on the timeline. If the end time of the implementation period of one energy-saving technological transformation project is later than the start time of the implementation period of another energy-saving technological transformation project, and the start time of the implementation period of the first energy-saving technological transformation project is earlier than the end time of the second energy-saving technological transformation project, then the implementation periods of the two energy-saving technological transformation projects are considered to overlap.

[0197] Step 413c: If the implementation periods overlap and the target identification of the two energy-saving technological transformation projects overlap, it is determined that the two energy-saving technological transformation projects cannot be implemented at the same time.

[0198] It is understandable that when two energy-saving technological transformation projects carry out construction and renovation on the same equipment or process object at the same time, physical space conflicts and competition for construction resources will occur, making it impossible for the two energy-saving technological transformation projects to proceed in parallel.

[0199] Step 413d: If the implementation periods do not overlap, or the target identifiers of the two energy-saving technological transformation projects do not overlap, it is determined that the two energy-saving technological transformation projects can be implemented simultaneously.

[0200] When the implementation periods of two energy-saving technological transformation projects are completely separated in time, or when the two energy-saving technological transformation projects are applied to different equipment or process objects, there is no physical conflict or resource competition, and it is determined that the two energy-saving technological transformation projects can be implemented simultaneously.

[0201] Step 414: If they cannot be implemented simultaneously, mark the energy-saving technological transformation project pair as an exclusive project pair.

[0202] Energy-saving technological upgrading projects that are determined not to be implemented simultaneously will be marked as exclusive project pairs. Exclusive project pairs indicate that the two energy-saving technological upgrading projects in the pair are mutually exclusive, and should be avoided when selecting them simultaneously when constructing project portfolios.

[0203] Step 415: When constructing a project portfolio, avoid including two energy-saving technological improvement projects from an exclusive project pair into the same project portfolio.

[0204] During the process of selecting energy-saving technological upgrading projects from candidate projects to form a project portfolio, it is checked whether the proposed energy-saving technological upgrading projects form an exclusive project pair with the energy-saving technological upgrading projects already selected in the project portfolio. If they form an exclusive project pair, the energy-saving technological upgrading project will not be included in the current project portfolio, but will instead be included in another project portfolio or excluded. This constraint ensures that the energy-saving technological upgrading projects in each project portfolio can be implemented in a physically coordinated manner.

[0205] Step 420: For each energy-saving technological transformation project in the project portfolio, based on the influence relationship, deduce the changes in the emission reduction effect of each energy-saving technological transformation project under different implementation sequences.

[0206] Traditional methods assume that the total emission reduction of a project portfolio is simply the sum of the annual emission reductions of each energy-saving technological upgrading project. This calculation implicitly assumes that the emission reduction of each project is a fixed constant. However, when there are interrelationships, the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects is essentially a function of the completion status of preceding energy-saving technological upgrading projects. Different implementation sequences will lead to different energy structure states of enterprises where subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects are located, thus producing different emission reduction effects.

[0207] Understandably, by simulating the changes in emission reduction effects under different implementation sequences, we can identify path traps that lead to a significant reduction in emission reduction effects due to incorrect implementation sequences during the planning stage. We can also uncover hidden efficiency-enhancing opportunities where subsequent projects can increase emission reduction potential due to improvements in the energy structure made by preceding projects.

[0208] Specifically, step 420 includes steps 421 to 426:

[0209] Step 421: Select two implementation sequences from the different implementation sequences as comparison sequences.

[0210] The implementation order refers to the sequential order in which the energy-saving technological upgrading projects within the project portfolio are implemented. For a project portfolio containing n energy-saving technological upgrading projects, there are n factorial possible implementation orders.

[0211] The comparison order consists of two representative implementation orders selected to compare and analyze the impact of differences in implementation order on emission reduction effects.

[0212] For example, for a project combination including blast furnace gas recovery system renovation project A, rolling mill heating furnace waste heat utilization device project B, and motor frequency conversion energy-saving renovation project C, there are six possible implementation sequences: A→B→C, A→C→B, B→A→C, B→C→A, C→A→B, and C→B→A. We select A→B→C and B→A→C as comparison sequences. The former indicates that project A is implemented first, then project B, and finally project C; the latter indicates that project B is implemented first, then project A, and finally project C.

[0213] Step 422: For the first implementation sequence in the comparison sequence, simulate the first change in the enterprise's energy structure caused by the preceding energy-saving technological transformation project based on the change method.

[0214] Among them, the preceding energy-saving technological transformation projects are those that are listed first in the first implementation sequence. The subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects are those that are listed last in the first implementation sequence.

[0215] It is easy to understand that the completion of the preceding energy-saving technological transformation project will change the company's energy structure according to its corresponding change method. This change constitutes the new operating environment faced when the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation project is implemented.

[0216] Specifically, based on the change method determined in step 340 of the preceding energy-saving technological transformation project, the specific impact of the change method on the enterprise's energy structure is simulated.

[0217] Furthermore, step 422 specifically includes steps 422a to 422c:

[0218] Step 422a: Identify the time when the changes in the enterprise's energy structure caused by the preceding energy-saving technological transformation project take effect.

[0219] The effective date is the point at which the preceding energy-saving technological upgrading project is completed, accepted, and put into operation, and its changes begin to impact the company's energy structure. The effective date is determined based on the implementation period and trial operation cycle of the preceding energy-saving technological upgrading project.

[0220] Step 422b: For subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects that have been put into operation before the effective date, determine the emission reduction losses generated by the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects operating under the enterprise's energy structure before the change.

[0221] It should be noted that this is a key manifestation of path dependence. When the implementation sequence is incorrect, subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects may be put into operation before the changes of the preceding energy-saving technological upgrading projects take effect. In this case, the subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects can only operate under the initial low-quality energy structure. Even if the subsequent preceding energy-saving technological upgrading projects improve energy quality, the equipment of the installed and operating subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects cannot retroactively increase their historical emission reductions.

[0222] Understandably, the failure to fully realize emission reduction potential due to this misalignment constitutes an irrecoverable loss.

[0223] Specifically, the commissioning time of the subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading project is compared with the effective time of the preceding energy-saving technological upgrading project. When the commissioning time of the subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading project is earlier than the effective time of the preceding energy-saving technological upgrading project, the length of the time period between the commissioning time of the subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading project and the effective time of the preceding energy-saving technological upgrading project is calculated. During this time period, if the subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading project operates under the enterprise's energy structure before the change, its actual emission reduction is lower than the emission reduction potential under the enterprise's energy structure after the change; the difference between the two is the emission reduction loss.

[0224] Step 422c: Mark the emission reduction loss as a sequence-dependent loss that cannot be traced back for compensation.

[0225] Step 423: Based on the first change, assess the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the changed corporate energy structure to obtain the first emission reduction potential.

[0226] Specifically, step 423 includes steps 423a to 423e:

[0227] Step 423a: Based on the changed enterprise energy structure, determine the baseline operating environment for subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects.

[0228] The baseline operating environment refers to the enterprise's energy structure status during the implementation and operation of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects. This baseline operating environment is formed by the impact of preceding energy-saving technological upgrading projects on the enterprise's energy structure. For example, in the implementation sequence A→B→C, after the implementation of project A, the enterprise's energy structure status is 4200 kJ / standard cubic meter calorific value of blast furnace gas. This status is used as the baseline operating environment for subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading project B.

[0229] Step 423b: Use the baseline state of the operating environment as the design input condition for subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0230] When assessing the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects, the energy quality parameters in the baseline operating environment are used as input conditions for equipment selection and process configuration of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects.

[0231] Step 423c: Based on the design input conditions, re-evaluate the equipment selection parameters and process configuration parameters of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the baseline operating environment.

[0232] The equipment selection parameters include the technical parameters of the equipment in subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects, such as model, capacity, and heat exchange area. The process configuration parameters include the process flow settings and operating parameters of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects.

[0233] Specifically, based on the energy quality conditions provided by the baseline operating environment, the energy recovery or energy efficiency improvement level that subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects can achieve under these conditions is recalculated, and the equipment selection parameters and process configuration parameters are determined accordingly.

[0234] Step 423d: Calculate the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects based on the re-evaluated equipment selection parameters and process configuration parameters.

[0235] Based on the reassessed equipment selection parameters and process configuration parameters, the annual emission reduction that subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects can achieve under the baseline operating environment is calculated. This annual emission reduction is the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the changed corporate energy structure.

[0236] Step 423e: When assessing the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrades under the changed corporate energy structure, deduct the sequence dependency loss.

[0237] It should be noted that if a subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading project has already been put into operation before the preceding energy-saving technological upgrading project takes effect, there is a sequence dependency loss marked in step 422c. The emission reduction effect of this sequence dependency loss has been irretrievably lost and needs to be deducted from the total emission reduction potential of the subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading project.

[0238] Specifically, the actual effective emission reduction potential of the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation project is obtained by subtracting the sequence dependency loss determined in step 422c from the emission reduction potential of the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation project calculated in step 423d.

[0239] The actual effective emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects is defined as the first emission reduction potential. The first emission reduction potential reflects the actual emission reduction that subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects can contribute under the first implementation sequence.

[0240] Step 424: For the second implementation sequence in the comparison sequence, simulate the second change in the enterprise's energy structure caused by the preceding energy-saving technological transformation project based on the change method.

[0241] Using the same method as in step 422, for the preceding energy-saving technological transformation projects in the second implementation sequence, the changes that the preceding energy-saving technological transformation projects will bring to the enterprise's energy structure are simulated based on their corresponding change methods, and the effective time of the changes is identified to determine whether there are sequence-dependent losses.

[0242] Step 425: Based on the second change, assess the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the changed corporate energy structure to obtain the second emission reduction potential.

[0243] Using the same method as in step 423, for the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects in the second implementation sequence, the baseline state of the operating environment is determined based on the changed enterprise energy structure, the emission reduction potential of the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects is reassessed, and the second emission reduction potential is obtained after deducting the sequence dependency loss.

[0244] For example, in the implementation sequence A→B→C, Project A is implemented before Project B. After the changes to Project A take effect, Project B is designed and implemented under the modified operating environment baseline, and there is no loss due to sequence dependency. Project B's emission reduction potential is 2,300 tons of CO2 equivalent per year, which is considered the second emission reduction potential.

[0245] Step 426: Compare the first emission reduction potential with the second emission reduction potential to determine the change in emission reduction effect.

[0246] The change in emission reduction effect is the difference in emission reduction potential between the first and second implementation sequences of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0247] Specifically, the difference between the second and first emission reduction potentials is calculated, and this difference represents the change in emission reduction effect. When the difference is positive, it indicates that the second implementation sequence is better than the first, enabling subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects to achieve higher emission reduction potential; when the difference is negative, it indicates that the first implementation sequence is better than the second.

[0248] Step 430: Identify the implementation sequence that maximizes the cumulative emission reductions of the project portfolio as the preferred implementation sequence.

[0249] The cumulative emission reduction is the sum of the emission reduction potential of all energy-saving technological transformation projects in the project portfolio under a specific implementation sequence.

[0250] It is easy to understand that, through the deduction process in steps 420 to 426, the cumulative emission reductions of the project portfolio under various possible implementation sequences can be calculated. Different implementation sequences will lead to significant differences in cumulative emission reductions due to the different impact relationships between preceding and subsequent projects.

[0251] Specifically, it iterates through all possible or representative implementation sequences of the project portfolio, calculating the cumulative emission reductions for each sequence. The cumulative emission reductions for each sequence are compared, and the sequence that maximizes the cumulative emission reductions is identified and selected as the preferred implementation sequence.

[0252] Step 440: Compare the cumulative emission reductions with the carbon quota deficit to obtain the remaining deficit.

[0253] The cumulative emission reductions corresponding to the preferred implementation sequence are compared with the carbon allowance gap obtained in step 100. When the cumulative emission reductions are less than the carbon allowance gap, the difference is the remaining gap, which represents the carbon allowance gap that cannot be fully filled even after implementing all energy-saving technological upgrades in the project portfolio. When the cumulative emission reductions are greater than or equal to the carbon allowance gap, the remaining gap is zero, indicating that the energy-saving technological upgrades in the project portfolio have met the emission reduction targets.

[0254] Step 450: Determine the number of CCER projects based on the remaining gap.

[0255] The number of CCER projects refers to the number of alternative CCER project quotas that need to be purchased to offset the remaining gap.

[0256] Specifically, based on the unit offset amount of the candidate CCER projects obtained in step 270, the number of candidate CCER project quotas required to make up for the remaining gap is calculated. The calculation method is to divide the remaining gap by the unit offset amount. When the remaining gap is zero, the number of CCER projects is zero, indicating that no carbon emission offset is required through candidate CCER projects.

[0257] Step 460: Combine the preferred implementation sequence, project portfolio, and number of CCER projects to form a candidate carbon reduction path.

[0258] The preferred implementation sequence determined in step 430, the project combination constructed in step 410, and the number of CCER projects determined in step 450 are combined to form a complete candidate carbon reduction path. The candidate carbon reduction path includes the technical routes and implementation arrangements for achieving carbon quota gap filling.

[0259] For example, one candidate carbon reduction path is described as follows: implement the motor frequency conversion energy-saving renovation project, the blast furnace gas recovery system renovation project, and the steel rolling heating furnace waste heat utilization device project in the order of C→A→B. The cumulative emission reduction of the three energy-saving technological renovation projects is 5,700 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. At the same time, purchase 4,300 units of alternative CCER project quotas to offset the remaining carbon quota gap.

[0260] By changing the composition of the project portfolio or adjusting the implementation sequence, multiple candidate carbon reduction paths can be constructed. These candidate paths differ in terms of emission reduction effectiveness, energy consumption, and implementation time, requiring optimization in subsequent steps to determine the optimal target carbon reduction path.

[0261] Step 500: Optimize the candidate carbon reduction paths to determine the target carbon reduction path.

[0262] It should be noted that the multiple candidate carbon reduction paths constructed through step 400 differ in terms of emission reduction effectiveness, energy consumption input, and timeline. Traditional methods typically focus only on whether the total emission reduction of the candidate carbon reduction paths meets the carbon quota gap, neglecting the phased carbon emission limit constraints faced by enterprises during actual implementation. However, in carbon emission management practice, enterprises not only need to achieve overall emission reduction targets throughout the entire planning cycle, but also need to ensure that actual emissions in each annual or quarterly period do not exceed the emission limits for the corresponding phase.

[0263] Understandably, the implementation sequence and cycle of energy-saving technological upgrading projects in candidate carbon reduction pathways determine the effective time of emission reduction effects for each project, thus affecting the actual level of corporate carbon emissions at each time stage. If candidate carbon reduction pathways are improperly arranged, the emission reductions at certain time stages may be insufficient to meet emission limits, and even if the overall emission reductions are sufficient, compliance risks may arise due to periodic over-emissions. Therefore, it is necessary to optimize the candidate carbon reduction pathways and, under the premise of meeting emission limit constraints at each time stage, select the candidate carbon reduction pathway with the minimum energy consumption input as the target carbon reduction pathway.

[0264] In some embodiments, step 500 may be specifically implemented as steps 510 to 590:

[0265] Step 510: For each candidate carbon reduction path, simulate the evolution of corporate carbon emissions at multiple time stages during the implementation of the candidate carbon reduction path.

[0266] The time period is a unit of division in the enterprise's carbon emission management cycle. The time period can be annual, quarterly, or monthly, determined according to the enterprise's carbon emission quota assessment cycle. In this embodiment, the time period is set to annually. The evolution refers to the dynamic change in the enterprise's carbon emission level as energy-saving technological upgrading projects in candidate carbon reduction pathways are gradually implemented.

[0267] Specifically, for a candidate carbon reduction path, the implementation sequence and cycle of each energy-saving technological upgrading project within that path are extracted. Based on the implementation sequence and cycle, the completion and commissioning timelines for each energy-saving technological upgrading project are determined. The planning period is divided into multiple time phases, simulating the carbon emission levels of enterprises in each time phase.

[0268] For example, a candidate carbon reduction pathway includes three energy-saving technological upgrading projects implemented in the order A→B→C. Project A has an implementation period of 6 months, completed and put into operation in June of the first year; Project B has an implementation period of 5 months, completed and put into operation in May of the second year; and Project C has an implementation period of 4 months, completed and put into operation in December of the second year. The planning period is set to 3 years, divided into three time phases: year 1, year 2, and year 3. The evolution of corporate carbon emissions is simulated: Project A begins to produce emission reduction effects in the second half of year 1; Projects B and C are put into operation successively in year 2 and produce emission reduction effects; and in year 3, all three projects are operating stably and producing emission reduction effects.

[0269] Step 520: At each time period, obtain the emission reductions generated by the completed energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0270] Among them, the energy-saving technological transformation projects that have been implemented and completed are those that have been put into operation before the end of the current time phase.

[0271] Specifically, for each time period, based on the commissioning time nodes of each energy-saving technological transformation project determined in step 510, identify the energy-saving technological transformation projects that have been completed within the current time period. Obtain the emission reduction of the completed energy-saving technological transformation projects within the current time period.

[0272] It should be noted that the emission reductions of energy-saving technological upgrading projects need to be recalculated based on the actual operating time during the first phase after commissioning. For example, if Project A is commissioned in June of the first year, then Project A only operates for 6 months in the first year, and the emission reductions in the first year are half of the annual emission reductions for Project A.

[0273] Step 530: Obtain the company's emission limits for each time period.

[0274] Emission limits are the maximum amount of carbon emissions a company is allowed to emit within a specific time period. These limits are determined by carbon emission management requirements or carbon quota allocation schemes.

[0275] Step 540: Identify the time period in which emission reductions cannot enable a company to meet its carbon emission limits.

[0276] Understandably, a company's actual emissions at different times depend on its total annual carbon emissions and the emission reductions generated by completed energy-saving technological upgrades. When emission reductions are insufficient, the company's actual emissions will exceed the emission limits, leading to compliance risks.

[0277] Specifically, step 540 includes steps 541 to 544:

[0278] Step 541: Obtain the total annual carbon emissions for the time period.

[0279] Based on the total annual carbon emissions for the current year calculated in step 140 and the emission prediction function fitted in step 120, the total annual carbon emissions for each time period are calculated.

[0280] Step 542: Subtract the emission reductions generated by the completed energy-saving technological upgrading projects to obtain the actual emissions for the time period.

[0281] The actual emissions figure is the net carbon emissions of the enterprise after considering the emission reduction effect of energy-saving technological transformation projects at the current time stage.

[0282] Specifically, the difference between the total annual carbon emissions for the time period and the emission reductions generated by the completed energy-saving technological upgrading projects obtained in step 520 will be used as the actual emissions for the time period.

[0283] Step 543: Compare the actual emissions with the emission limits corresponding to the time period.

[0284] Step 544: If the actual emissions exceed the emission limit, the time period is identified as the insufficient emission reduction stage.

[0285] When the actual emissions of a time period exceed the emission limit corresponding to that time period, the company's emission reduction in the current time period is deemed insufficient to meet the emission limit requirements, and the current time period is marked as an insufficient emission reduction period.

[0286] When the actual emissions of a time period are less than or equal to the emission limit corresponding to that time period, the enterprise is deemed to meet the emission limit requirements for the current time period, and the current time period is not marked as an insufficient emission reduction period.

[0287] Step 550: Use the number of identified time periods as a path compliance indicator for candidate carbon reduction pathways.

[0288] The pathway compliance index is an evaluation metric used to measure whether candidate carbon reduction pathways meet emission quota constraints at each time stage. The value of the pathway compliance index is equal to the number of time stages identified as insufficient emission reduction stages.

[0289] It's easy to understand that the smaller the pathway compliance index, the fewer periods during which the candidate carbon reduction pathway violates emission limits, and the better its compliance. When the pathway compliance index is zero, it means that the candidate carbon reduction pathway meets emission limits in all periods, and is fully compliant with emission constraints.

[0290] For example, the above-mentioned candidate carbon reduction pathways have three stages of insufficient emission reduction, and the pathway compliance index is 3.

[0291] For different candidate carbon reduction pathways, the implementation sequence and cycle of energy-saving technological transformation projects are different, resulting in different time distribution of emission reduction effects, which leads to differences in the pathway compliance indicators of each candidate carbon reduction pathway.

[0292] Step 560: Construct a constrained optimization model. The constrained optimization model aims to minimize the total energy consumption of the selected candidate carbon reduction paths, with path compliance indicators as constraints.

[0293] It should be noted that when choosing a carbon reduction path, enterprises not only need to meet the compliance requirements of carbon emission quotas, but also need to select the option with the least resource input from multiple candidate carbon reduction paths that meet the constraints, so as to achieve carbon reduction goals while reducing the implementation burden.

[0294] The total energy input is the sum of the energy input from implementing all energy-saving technological upgrading projects in the candidate carbon reduction pathways and the unit energy input from purchasing CCER quotas for alternative projects. The total energy input reflects the comprehensive resource input required to implement the candidate carbon reduction pathways.

[0295] Specifically, a constrained optimization model is constructed. The objective function of the constrained optimization model is to minimize the total energy consumption of the selected candidate carbon reduction paths. The constraints of the constrained optimization model include: First, the path compliance index is equal to zero, that is, the selected candidate carbon reduction paths must meet the emission limits in all time periods; Second, the sum of the cumulative emission reductions of the selected candidate carbon reduction paths and the offset amount of the purchased alternative CCER project quotas is not less than the carbon quota gap, that is, the selected candidate carbon reduction paths must be able to make up for the enterprise's carbon quota gap.

[0296] The decision variable in the constrained optimization model is the selection status of candidate carbon reduction pathways. The selection status is a binary variable; a selection status of 1 indicates that the candidate carbon reduction pathway has been selected, and a selection status of 0 indicates that the candidate carbon reduction pathway has not been selected.

[0297] For example, there are three candidate carbon reduction paths: candidate carbon reduction path 1, candidate carbon reduction path 2, and candidate carbon reduction path 3. Candidate carbon reduction path 1 has a total energy input of 8000 units of resources and a path compliance index of 3; candidate carbon reduction path 2 has a total energy input of 9500 units of resources and a path compliance index of 0; and candidate carbon reduction path 3 has a total energy input of 9200 units of resources and a path compliance index of 1. A constrained optimization model is constructed, with the objective function being to minimize the total energy input of the selected candidate carbon reduction path. The constraint condition requires that the path compliance index of the selected candidate carbon reduction path be equal to zero.

[0298] Step 570: Solve the constrained optimization model.

[0299] The constrained optimization model constructed in step 560 is solved using optimization algorithms such as linear programming, integer programming, or mixed integer programming. The solution process searches for the selected state combinations of candidate carbon reduction paths to find a feasible solution that satisfies all constraints and minimizes the objective function value.

[0300] The optimization results include the optimal values ​​for each candidate carbon reduction path and the corresponding optimal values ​​for the objective function.

[0301] For example, after solving the above constrained optimization model, the optimization results are as follows: the selection status of candidate carbon reduction path 1 is 0, the selection status of candidate carbon reduction path 2 is 1, the selection status of candidate carbon reduction path 3 is 0, and the optimal value of the objective function is 9500 units of resource. The optimization results show that, under the premise of satisfying the emission limit constraints in all time stages, candidate carbon reduction path 2 has the minimum total energy consumption.

[0302] Step 580: Extract the candidate carbon reduction paths selected from the optimization solution results.

[0303] From the optimization results obtained in step 570, candidate carbon reduction paths with state 1 are identified and extracted as the selected candidate carbon reduction paths.

[0304] For example, candidate carbon reduction path 2 can be extracted from the above optimization solution as the selected candidate carbon reduction path.

[0305] Step 590: Extract the implementation sequence of energy-saving technological transformation projects and the number of CCER projects from the selected candidate carbon reduction pathways.

[0306] From the selected candidate carbon reduction paths extracted in step 580, the implementation sequence of energy-saving technological transformation projects and the number of alternative CCER projects are obtained as specific plans for enterprises to implement carbon reduction paths.

[0307] Furthermore, step 590 specifically includes steps 591 to 595:

[0308] Step 591: Construct path monitoring rules to obtain the actual emission reduction of each energy-saving technological transformation project during path execution.

[0309] It should be noted that the selected candidate carbon reduction pathways are planned based on the theoretical emission reduction potential of energy-saving technological upgrading projects. However, in actual implementation, these projects are affected by factors such as equipment operating status, process control levels, and changes in the external environment, and the actual emission reduction may deviate from the planned expected value. If the actual emission reduction is lower than expected, the emission reduction targets for subsequent time periods may not be achieved. Therefore, it is necessary to dynamically track the implementation process of the pathways and make timely adjustments when deviations are detected.

[0310] Among them, the path monitoring rules are a system of rules for tracking and monitoring the actual emission reduction effects of energy-saving technological transformation projects. The path monitoring rules include monitoring indicators, monitoring frequency, deviation judgment criteria, etc.

[0311] Specifically, the actual emission reduction of each energy-saving technological upgrading project is set as the key monitoring indicator. The monitoring frequency is set to collect the operation data of the energy-saving technological upgrading projects monthly or quarterly and calculate the actual emission reduction. The deviation judgment standard is set to trigger the path adjustment process when the actual emission reduction of the energy-saving technological upgrading project is lower than the preset deviation threshold of the annual emission reduction of the corresponding energy-saving technological upgrading project in the selected candidate carbon reduction path. In this embodiment, the preset deviation threshold can be set to 10%, for example, when the actual emission reduction is lower than 90% of the annual emission reduction, the adjustment is triggered.

[0312] Step 592: Compare the actual emission reduction with the annual emission reduction of the corresponding energy-saving technological transformation projects in the selected candidate carbon reduction pathways.

[0313] During the operation of each energy-saving technological transformation project after its commissioning, the actual emission reduction of each project is periodically obtained according to the path monitoring rules constructed in step 591. The actual emission reduction is compared with the annual emission reduction of the corresponding energy-saving technological transformation project planned in the selected candidate carbon reduction path, and the deviation rate between the actual emission reduction and the annual emission reduction is calculated.

[0314] Step 593: If the actual emission reduction is lower than the annual emission reduction, reassess the emission reduction potential of the unimplemented energy-saving technological transformation projects based on the completed energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0315] When the actual emission reduction is lower than the annual emission reduction and the deviation rate exceeds the preset deviation threshold, it is determined that the emission reduction effect of the completed energy-saving technological transformation project has not met expectations.

[0316] Understandably, the actual emission reductions of completed energy-saving technological upgrading projects are lower than expected, indicating a discrepancy between the actual changes these projects bring to a company's energy structure and the predictions made during the planning stage. This discrepancy will propagate along the influence chain to projects that have not implemented energy-saving technological upgrading, causing changes in the baseline operating environment of these projects and consequently altering their emission reduction potential. Therefore, it is necessary to reassess the emission reduction potential of projects that have not implemented energy-saving technological upgrading based on the actual status of completed projects.

[0317] Furthermore, step 593 includes steps 593a to 593d:

[0318] Step 593a: Obtain the changes in the enterprise's energy structure caused by the completed energy-saving technological transformation projects.

[0319] Based on the actual operational data of completed energy-saving technological upgrading projects, this analysis examines the actual ways in which these projects have altered the enterprise's energy structure. These actual changes include the actual changes in energy quality parameters and the actual degree of improvement in energy supply stability.

[0320] Step 593b: Update energy flow relationships based on changes in method.

[0321] Apply the actual changes of the completed energy-saving technological transformation projects obtained in step 593a to the enterprise's energy flow relationship, and update the energy quality status parameters of the relevant energy nodes in the energy flow relationship.

[0322] Step 593c: Based on the updated energy flow relationship, redetermine the impact of the unimplemented energy-saving technological transformation projects on the enterprise's energy structure.

[0323] Using the same method as in step 300, based on the updated energy flow relationship in step 593b, the role and upstream and downstream relationships of the unimplemented energy-saving technological transformation projects in the updated energy flow relationship are re-identified, and the impact of the unimplemented energy-saving technological transformation projects on the enterprise's energy structure is re-determined.

[0324] Step 593d: Calculate the emission reduction potential of projects that have not implemented energy-saving technological upgrades based on the redefined impact relationships.

[0325] Using the same method as in step 423, and based on the influence relationship re-determined in step 593c, the updated enterprise energy structure status is used as the operating environment baseline status for projects that have not implemented energy-saving technological transformation. The equipment selection parameters and process configuration parameters of projects that have not implemented energy-saving technological transformation are re-evaluated, and the emission reduction potential of projects that have not implemented energy-saving technological transformation is calculated.

[0326] Step 594: Adjust the implementation sequence of the unimplemented energy-saving technological transformation projects based on the reassessed emission reduction potential, and formulate the adjusted implementation plan.

[0327] Based on the emission reduction potential of the unimplemented energy-saving technological upgrading projects recalculated in step 593d, the same method as in steps 420 to 430 is used to deduce the changes in emission reduction effects of the unimplemented energy-saving technological upgrading projects under different implementation sequences, and to identify the implementation sequence that maximizes the cumulative emission reduction of the unimplemented energy-saving technological upgrading projects. The re-identified implementation sequence is then combined with the completed energy-saving technological upgrading projects to form an adjusted implementation plan.

[0328] For example, if the original selected candidate carbon reduction pathways did not include energy-saving technological upgrades, and the implementation order was B→C, a reassessment of emission reduction potential revealed that the C→B order would result in greater cumulative emission reductions. The implementation order was then adjusted to C→B, and combined with the already completed project A, the revised implementation plan became A→C→B.

[0329] The revised implementation plan also includes an adjusted number of candidate CCER projects based on the reassessed emission reduction potential. Due to changes in the emission reduction potential of projects that have not implemented energy-saving technological upgrades, the cumulative emission reduction of the project portfolio changes, and the remaining emission gap is adjusted accordingly, requiring a corresponding increase or decrease in the number of candidate CCER projects.

[0330] Step 595: Use the revised implementation plan as the target carbon reduction path.

[0331] The adjusted implementation plan formed in step 594 will be used as the enterprise's final target carbon reduction path. The target carbon reduction path reflects the dynamically optimized carbon reduction path plan based on actual implementation.

[0332] In summary, since a company's carbon reduction path is not a simple collection of projects but an ordered evolutionary process, this application identifies how preceding projects alter a company's energy structure and assesses the impact of these alterations on the emission reduction potential of subsequent projects. This allows for the discovery of path traps where incorrect implementation sequence leads to a significant reduction in emission reduction effectiveness during the planning stage. This avoids the planning failure problem caused by traditional methods neglecting the interaction between projects and uncovers hidden efficiency-enhancing opportunities where preceding projects improve the energy structure, thereby increasing the emission reduction potential of subsequent projects. This ensures that the planned path achieves the expected emission reduction effect during actual implementation.

[0333] Furthermore, the advantages of this application are reflected in the following aspects:

[0334] First, it identifies the shortcomings of traditional methods in implicit but not explicit system assumptions, namely, ignoring the physical coupling structure of the energy system.

[0335] The second approach utilizes the intermediate variable of changing methods to characterize the mechanism by which preceding projects affect the enterprise's state, thus concretizing the abstract influence relationship into a simulateable change in energy quality.

[0336] Third, a path space search method was constructed by comparing the order of deduction, which expanded the combinatorial optimization problem from the selection of item subsets with exponential complexity to a higher-dimensional space that considers the order of arrangement. At the same time, unreasonable order branches were pruned by the influence relationship constraint.

[0337] See Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the hardware structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of this application. The electronic device 40 includes: a processor 41, a memory 42, and a computer program; wherein,

[0338] The memory 42 is used to store the computer program, and the memory may also be flash memory. The computer program is, for example, an application program or functional module that implements the above method.

[0339] The processor 41 is configured to execute the computer program stored in the memory to implement the various steps performed by the device in the above method. For details, please refer to the relevant descriptions in the preceding method embodiments.

[0340] Alternatively, the memory 42 can be either standalone or integrated with the processor 41.

[0341] When the memory 42 is a device independent of the processor 41, the device may further include:

[0342] Bus 43 is used to connect the memory 42 and the processor 41.

[0343] This application also provides a readable storage medium storing a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, is used to implement the methods provided in the various embodiments described above.

[0344] The readable storage medium can be a computer storage medium or a communication medium. A communication medium includes any medium that facilitates the transfer of computer programs from one location to another. A computer storage medium can be any available medium accessible to a general-purpose or special-purpose computer. For example, a readable storage medium is coupled to a processor, enabling the processor to read information from and write information to the readable storage medium. Of course, the readable storage medium can also be a component of the processor. The processor and the readable storage medium can reside in an Application-Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC). Alternatively, the ASIC can be located in a user equipment. Of course, the processor and the readable storage medium can also exist as discrete components in a communication device. The readable storage medium can be a read-only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), CD-ROM, magnetic tape, floppy disk, and optical data storage device, etc.

[0345] This application also provides a program product including executable instructions stored in a readable storage medium. At least one processor of the device can read the executable instructions from the readable storage medium, and the at least one processor executes the executable instructions to cause the device to implement the methods provided in the various embodiments described above.

[0346] In the embodiments of the above-described device, it should be understood that the processor can be a Central Processing Unit (CPU), or other general-purpose processors, digital signal processors (DSPs), application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs), etc. The general-purpose processor can be a microprocessor or any conventional processor. The steps of the method disclosed in this application can be directly manifested as being executed by a hardware processor, or executed by a combination of hardware and software modules within the processor.

[0347] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of this application, and are not intended to limit them. Although this application has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications can still be made to the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or equivalent substitutions can be made to some or all of the technical features therein. Such modifications or substitutions do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application.

Claims

1. A method for optimizing enterprise carbon reduction pathways based on the synergy of CCER and energy-saving technological transformation, characterized in that, include: Obtain the carbon allowance shortfall of enterprises; Obtain project data for each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project and CCER project; Determine the impact of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project on the company's energy structure; Based on the aforementioned impact relationship, combined with the carbon quota gap and the project data, multiple candidate carbon reduction paths are constructed. Each candidate carbon reduction path includes the implementation sequence of energy-saving technological transformation projects, including: selecting at least one energy-saving technological transformation project from each of the candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects to form a project portfolio. For each energy-saving technological upgrading project in the project portfolio, the changes in the emission reduction effect of each energy-saving technological upgrading project under different implementation sequences are deduced based on the influence relationship. Identify the implementation sequence that maximizes the cumulative emission reductions of the project portfolio as the preferred implementation sequence; The remaining emission deficit is obtained by comparing the cumulative emission reduction with the carbon quota deficit. The number of CCER projects is determined based on the remaining gap. The preferred implementation sequence, the project combination, and the number of CCER projects are combined to form a candidate carbon reduction path; The candidate carbon reduction paths are optimized and solved to determine the target carbon reduction path.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The determination of the impact of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project on the enterprise's energy structure includes: To determine the key aspects of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project; Obtain the enterprise's energy flow relationship, which represents the upstream and downstream relationship between various energy links; Based on the aforementioned action links and the energy flow relationship, identify energy-saving technological transformation projects that affect the upstream links and those that affect the downstream links; For energy-saving technological upgrading projects that affect upstream and downstream processes, determine how energy-saving technological upgrading projects that affect upstream processes change the enterprise's energy structure. The manner of change is taken as the influence relationship.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The steps involved in obtaining each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project include: Obtain the equipment modification scope and process flow application scope of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project; Map the scope of equipment modification and the scope of the process flow to the energy flow relationship; Extract the energy node corresponding to the mapping, and use it as the functional link.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method for analyzing the emission reduction effects of each energy-saving technological upgrading project within the project portfolio, based on the aforementioned impact relationships, under different implementation sequences, includes: Two implementation sequences are selected as comparison sequences from the different implementation sequences. For the first implementation sequence in the comparison sequence, the first change in the enterprise's energy structure is simulated based on the change method. Based on the first change, the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the changed corporate energy structure is evaluated to obtain the first emission reduction potential. For the second implementation order in the comparison sequence, the second change to the enterprise's energy structure is simulated based on the change method; Based on the second change, the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the changed corporate energy structure is evaluated to obtain the second emission reduction potential. By comparing the first emission reduction potential with the second emission reduction potential, the change in the emission reduction effect is determined.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that, The step of selecting at least one energy-saving technological upgrading project from the candidate energy-saving technological upgrading projects to form a project portfolio includes: Obtain the target identification of each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project; Identify energy-saving technological upgrading projects where the target objects overlap; For the aforementioned energy-saving technological upgrading projects, determine whether the two energy-saving technological upgrading projects can be implemented simultaneously; If they cannot be implemented simultaneously, the energy-saving technological upgrading projects shall be marked as exclusive project pairs. When constructing the project portfolio, avoid including two energy-saving technological upgrading projects from the exclusive project pair into the same project portfolio at the same time.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, The determination of whether two energy-saving technological upgrading projects can be implemented simultaneously includes: Obtain the implementation periods for each of the two energy-saving technological upgrading projects; Determine whether the implementation periods overlap; If the implementation periods overlap and the target identifiers of the two energy-saving technological transformation projects overlap, it is determined that the two energy-saving technological transformation projects cannot be implemented simultaneously. If the implementation periods do not overlap, or the target identifiers of the two energy-saving technological transformation projects do not overlap, it is determined that the two energy-saving technological transformation projects can be implemented simultaneously.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The optimization solution for the candidate carbon reduction pathways includes: For each candidate carbon reduction path, the evolution of corporate carbon emissions during the implementation of the candidate carbon reduction path is simulated at multiple time stages; At each time period, obtain the emission reductions generated by the energy-saving technological upgrading projects that have been implemented and completed; Obtain the emission limits of the enterprise at each time period; Identify the time period during which the emission reductions cannot enable the enterprise to meet the emission limits; The number of identified time periods will be used as a path compliance indicator for the candidate carbon reduction pathways. A constrained optimization model is constructed, which aims to minimize the total energy consumption of the selected candidate carbon reduction paths and uses the path compliance index as a constraint. Solve the constrained optimization model.

8. The method according to claim 7, characterized in that, The time period during which the emission reduction cannot enable the enterprise to meet the emission limit includes: Obtain the total annual carbon emissions for the specified time period; The actual emissions for the time period are obtained by deducting the emission reductions generated by the energy-saving technological upgrading projects that have been implemented and completed. Compare the actual emissions with the emission limits corresponding to the time period; If the actual emissions exceed the emission limit, the time period is identified as a period of insufficient emission reduction.

9. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The determination of the target carbon reduction pathway includes: Extract the candidate carbon reduction paths that are selected from the optimization results; Extract the implementation sequence of energy-saving technological upgrading projects and the number of CCER projects from the selected candidate carbon reduction pathways; Construct path monitoring rules to obtain the actual emission reduction of each energy-saving technological transformation project during path execution; Compare the actual emission reduction with the annual emission reduction of the corresponding energy-saving technological transformation projects in the selected candidate carbon reduction paths; If the actual emission reduction is lower than the annual emission reduction, the emission reduction potential of the non-energy-saving technological transformation projects will be reassessed based on the energy-saving technological transformation projects that have been implemented and completed. The implementation sequence of projects that have not yet undergone energy-saving technological upgrades will be adjusted based on the reassessed emission reduction potential, resulting in a revised implementation plan; The adjusted implementation plan is taken as the target carbon reduction path.

10. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The acquisition of project data for each candidate energy-saving technological upgrading project and CCER project includes: Acquire multiple initial energy-saving technological upgrading projects; Obtain the industry type of the enterprise; Based on the industry type, initial energy-saving technological transformation projects that match the industry type of the enterprise are selected as candidate energy-saving technological transformation projects; Obtain the energy consumption input and annual emission reduction of the selected energy-saving technological upgrading projects; Obtain multiple alternative CCER projects; Based on the approval status of the candidate CCER projects, candidate CCER projects with an approval status of "filed" or "issued" are selected. Obtain the unit energy consumption input and unit offset of the selected candidate CCER projects.

11. The method according to claim 10, characterized in that, The acquisition of the carbon allowance deficit of enterprises includes: Obtain the emission data and quota data of the enterprise within a preset time period; An emission prediction function is obtained by fitting the emission data; A quota prediction function is obtained by fitting the quota data; Substitute the emission prediction function into the current year to obtain the total annual carbon emissions; Substitute the quota prediction function into the current year to obtain the annual carbon quota allocation; The carbon quota gap is determined based on the total annual carbon emissions and the annual carbon quota allocation.

12. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that, The first implementation sequence in the comparison order, based on simulating the first change in the enterprise's energy structure caused by the preceding energy-saving technological transformation project through a change in method, includes: Identify the effective time of the changes in the enterprise's energy structure caused by the preceding energy-saving technological transformation project in the time dimension; For subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects that were already in operation before the effective time, determine the emission reduction losses generated by the subsequent energy-saving technological transformation projects under the enterprise's energy structure before the change. The emission reduction loss is marked as a sequence-dependent loss that cannot be traced back and compensated; When assessing the emission reduction potential of subsequent energy-saving technological upgrading projects under the changed corporate energy structure, the sequence dependency loss is deducted.

Images