Page 193 - Low Carbon Development in China and India
P. 193
diesel freight vehicle, RMB 120,000. Depreciation can be calculated using
Eqs (3.7)–(3.11) as follows:

dlgv = S lgv × Plgv ×θ (3.7)

dldv = S ldv × Pldv ×θ (3.8)

dhgv = S hgv × Phgv ×θ (3.9)

dhdv = S hdv × Phdv ×θ (3.10)

d = dlgv + d ldv + d hgv + d hdv (3.11)

Here, we assume that the depreciation change is in a straight line, with

the rate of depreciation θ =1.98 per cent (the value used at present in

China). Using the above equations, the depreciation in the BAU and
ILC scenarios are RMB 331,135 million and RMB 231,790 million.
RMB 993.45 million will be saved in the depreciation cost of freight
vehicles in ILC scenario. Refer to Appendix D, Table D.3 for details of
the depreciation costs in the BAU and ILC scenarios.

3.8.2 Economic Benefit Analysis in the AER Scenario
Similar to the ILC scenario, the total fuel consumption of freight
vehicles under the AER scenario will be less than that in the BAU
scenario due to the lower increase in the number of freight vehicles.
Using Eqs. (3.2)–(3.4), the cost for fuel consumption in the BAU and
AER scenario can be calculated as RMB 3.095 million and RMB 2.270
million, respectively. Compared with the BAU scenario, RMB 825
million will be saved in 2015 under the AER scenario. Appendix D,
Table D.4 presents the summary of the analysis results.
Using Eqs. (3.5)–(3.6), the costs for clean CO2 in the BAU and AER
scenarios can be calculated as RMB 20,080 million and RMB 14,026
million respectively. RMB 6,054 million will be saved for the cost of
clean CO2 in the AER scenario.
Besides, as freight vehicles are more efficiently used under the AER
scenario, there will be less depreciation cost than in the BAU scenario.
Using Eqs. (3.7)–(3.11), the depreciation in the BAU and AER scenarios
can be calculated as RMB 331,135 million and RMB 230,612 million,
respectively. RMB 1005.23 million will be saved in the depreciation
cost of freight vehicles in the AER scenario. Refer to Appendix D, Table
D.5 for the summary of the comparative analysis results.

158 Low Carbon Development in China and India
   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198