# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020175

## Electricity supply chain coordination with carbon abatement technology investment under the benchmarking mechanism

 1 School of Management and Economics, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 611731, China 2 School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 611731, China

* Corresponding author: Yongkai Ma

Received  July 2020 Revised  October 2020 Published  December 2020

The introduction of the benchmarking mechanism into the electricity industry has influenced whether utility firms choose to invest in carbon abatement technology. This study presents an electricity supply chain that includes a utility firm as the leader and a retailer as the follower to decide on the electricity price and carbon abatement technology investment. The study discusses the impact of the benchmarking mechanism on the decision-making of the electricity supply chain enterprises. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) Investing in carbon abatement technology increased electricity demand, customer surplus, and profits of the electricity supply chain enterprises. (2) Carbon abatement technology investment and profits of the supply chain enterprises increased with the unit carbon quota. (3) A revenue-sharing and cost-sharing contract could be used to coordinate the electricity supply chain.

Citation: Wei Chen, Yongkai Ma, Weihao Hu. Electricity supply chain coordination with carbon abatement technology investment under the benchmarking mechanism. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020175
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
Electricity supply chain with two strategies
Electricity price $p$ as $e_0$
Electricity demand $q$ as $e_0$
Carbon abatement technology investment $\xi$ as $e_0$
The supply chain enterprises' profits as $e_0$
Price sensitivity
Carbon abatement technology sensitivity
Notation and description of parameters
 Notation Description $q$ Electricity demand $a$ Potential electricity demand $b$ Sensitivity coefficient of electricity price $c$ Cost coefficient of electricity production $k$ Cost coefficient of carbon abatement technology investment $e_0$ Unit carbon emission-free quota under the BM $e$ Initial unit carbon emission $t$ Carbon price $\pi _R$ Profit of the electricity retailer $\pi _U$ $\pi _S$ Profit of the utility firm Profit of the supply chain Decision Variables $p$ Electricity price $w$ Electricity wholesale price $\xi$ Carbon abatement technology investment
 Notation Description $q$ Electricity demand $a$ Potential electricity demand $b$ Sensitivity coefficient of electricity price $c$ Cost coefficient of electricity production $k$ Cost coefficient of carbon abatement technology investment $e_0$ Unit carbon emission-free quota under the BM $e$ Initial unit carbon emission $t$ Carbon price $\pi _R$ Profit of the electricity retailer $\pi _U$ $\pi _S$ Profit of the utility firm Profit of the supply chain Decision Variables $p$ Electricity price $w$ Electricity wholesale price $\xi$ Carbon abatement technology investment
 [1] Juliang Zhang, Jian Chen. Information sharing in a make-to-stock supply chain. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2014, 10 (4) : 1169-1189. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2014.10.1169 [2] Marian Gidea, Rafael de la Llave, Tere M. Seara. A general mechanism of instability in Hamiltonian systems: Skipping along a normally hyperbolic invariant manifold. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2020, 40 (12) : 6795-6813. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2020166 [3] Wen-Bin Yang, Yan-Ling Li, Jianhua Wu, Hai-Xia Li. Dynamics of a food chain model with ratio-dependent and modified Leslie-Gower functional responses. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2015, 20 (7) : 2269-2290. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2015.20.2269

2019 Impact Factor: 1.366