pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.22839 · v3 · submitted 2025-11-28 · ⚛️ physics.soc-ph · cs.SY· econ.GN· eess.SY· q-fin.EC

Industrial overcapacity can enable seasonal flexibility in electricity use

Ruike Lyu , Anna Li , Jianxiao Wang , Hongxi Luo , Yan Shen , Hongye Guo , Ershun Du , Chongqing Kang
show 1 more author
Jesse Jenkins
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 04:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.soc-ph cs.SYecon.GNeess.SYq-fin.EC
keywords aluminum smeltingindustrial overcapacityseasonal operationelectricity system flexibilitydecarbonizationChina energy policyrenewable integration
0
0 comments X

The pith

Retaining overcapacity lets aluminum smelters run seasonally and cut China's decarbonized power system costs by 23-32 billion CNY a year.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper investigates how excess capacity in energy-intensive industries can be turned into an asset for flexible electricity consumption rather than a liability. Using China's aluminum smelting sector as an example, it models a scenario where smelters stop production in winter to ease pressure on the grid from heating demand and variable renewables. This strategy leads to lower overall system costs for investment and operation in a decarbonized setup. The calculated savings range from 23 to 32 billion CNY per year, enough to pay for extra maintenance and aluminum storage. Additional benefits include better labor alignment with power plants that might run less in other seasons.

Core claim

The central discovery is that industrial overcapacity in aluminum smelting can enable a seasonal operation paradigm. Smelters cease production during winter load peaks caused by heating electrification and renewable seasonality. This approach reduces the investment and operational costs of China's decarbonized electricity system by 23-32 billion CNY/year, equivalent to 11-15% of the industry's product value. The savings suffice to offset added smelter maintenance and product storage costs. It may also create labor complementarities between the aluminum and thermal power sectors.

What carries the argument

The seasonal operation paradigm of aluminum smelters, made possible by overcapacity, which allows halting production to avoid winter electricity peaks.

If this is right

  • The electricity system requires less investment in peak power capacity.
  • Operational costs decrease due to reduced need for expensive winter generation.
  • Extra maintenance and storage costs for smelters are covered by the system savings.
  • Labor needs in aluminum production can complement those in thermal power generation during off-seasons.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Other energy-intensive industries such as steel and cement might adopt similar seasonal flexibility strategies.
  • Energy planners could view industrial overcapacity as a low-cost source of demand response in renewable-heavy systems.
  • International contexts with similar seasonal demand patterns could explore this approach for their decarbonization pathways.

Load-bearing premise

Shifting aluminum smelters to seasonal operation is technically feasible and does not introduce significant unmodeled costs or disruptions to product supply.

What would settle it

If operating smelters seasonally leads to aluminum shortages, higher than expected maintenance costs, or actual system savings below 23 billion CNY per year, the proposed benefits would not hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.22839 by Anna Li, Chongqing Kang, Ershun Du, Hongxi Luo, Hongye Guo, Jesse Jenkins, Jianxiao Wang, Ruike Lyu, Yan Shen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Conceptual framework for overcapacity-enabled seasonal flexibility in energy-intensive industries. The left panel illustrates the spring to autumn time period when renewable energy generation is abundant, with aluminum smelters operating at full capacity, producing aluminum for both meeting immediate demand and storing in inventory. The right panel illustrates winter scenarios where renewable generation is… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: China’s projected aluminum demand and smelting overcapacity un￾der different scenarios. The top solid line represents total aluminum demand, the green area shows recycled aluminum production (RA), and the yellow area indicates pri￾mary aluminum production (PA) up to 2050. China’s aluminum smelting capacity at the end of 2024 (45 million tonnes (Mt) per year) is represented by the red dashed line. The area … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Reduction in electricity system costs due to overcapacity-enabled flex￾ibility in aluminum smelting, compared to the no-overcapacity case. Colors rep￾resent different sources of changes in system cost: renewable investment costs (green) and non-renewable operational costs (orange) account for the largest system cost reductions. The reduction in renewable investment costs reflects improved renewable energy … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Trade-off analysis and cost-effective strategy for retaining overca￾pacity. In (a), electricity system cost savings (blue), smelter operational cost increase (orange), and net system benefit (black line) are shown for 2050 in the core scenario (Mid￾flexibility, Mid-demand, and Mid-technology costs). The maximal net benefit (electricity system cost reduction minus smelter operational costs) is achieved with… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Seasonal operation of aluminum smelters is complementary to energy system seasonality. In (a), smelter production largely ceases from mid-November to mid-March with demand met by stored inventory, but operates at full capacity from late March to early November. In (b), the electricity consumption of aluminum smelting is largely complementary to China’s heating demand, avoiding the severe winter electricity… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of the composition of levelized cost per tonne of aluminum between the 2020 baseline and various 2050 overcapacity levels. The composition of the levelized cost per tonne of aluminum is shown across three overcapacity levels in the core scenario (Mid-flexibility, Mid-demand, and Mid-technology costs) and compared against a 2020 baseline. We find that maintaining 36% overcapacity is beneficial fo… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Estimated monthly workforce requirements for aluminum smelters and coal/gas power plants in 2050 with and without aluminum smelting over￾capacity. In the overcapacity scenario, complementary employment patterns between smelters and thermal generators reduce workforce variability (calculated as the standard deviation of employment throughout the year) by 62% and increase average employment by 18,000, as com… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In many countries, declining demand in energy-intensive industries (EIIs) such as cement, steel, and aluminum is leading to industrial overcapacity. Although industrial overcapacity is traditionally envisioned as problematic and resource-wasteful, it could unlock EIIs' flexibility in electricity use. Here, using China's aluminum smelting industry as a case study, we evaluate the system-level cost-benefit of retaining EII overcapacity for flexible electricity use in decarbonized energy systems. We find that overcapacity can enable aluminum smelters to adopt a seasonal operation paradigm, ceasing production during winter load peaks that are exacerbated by heating electrification and renewable seasonality. This seasonal operation paradigm could reduce the investment and operational costs of China's decarbonized electricity system by 23-32 billion CNY/year (11-15% of the aluminum smelting industry's product value), sufficient to offset the increased smelter maintenance and product storage costs associated with overcapacity. It may also create labor complementarities between the aluminum and thermal power sectors.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper uses China's aluminum smelting industry as a case study to argue that retaining industrial overcapacity enables a seasonal operation paradigm in which smelters cease production during winter electricity peaks driven by heating electrification and renewable seasonality. This flexibility is claimed to reduce decarbonized electricity-system investment and operational costs by 23-32 billion CNY/year (11-15% of industry product value), sufficient to offset added maintenance and storage costs while also generating labor complementarities with the thermal power sector.

Significance. If the quantitative results and feasibility assumptions hold, the work identifies a potentially important mechanism for leveraging existing overcapacity to lower decarbonization costs in systems with high renewable penetration and seasonal demand. The system-level cost-benefit framing and the specific CNY savings estimate provide a concrete, policy-relevant illustration that could extend to other energy-intensive industries.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods] Methods: The system model that produces the headline 23-32 billion CNY/year net savings is described at a high level only; key parameters for smelter shutdown feasibility, maintenance/storage costs, and the valuation of avoided winter peaks are not fully specified or validated against operational data. Because the central claim is that these savings exceed incremental overcapacity costs, insufficient documentation of the model structure and data sources undermines verifiability of the net-benefit result.
  2. [Results] Results: The reported cost savings are presented as the difference between electricity-system cost reduction and incremental overcapacity costs, yet no sensitivity analysis is shown for plausible increases in unmodeled disruption or supply-chain costs. If these parameters are optimistic, the 11-15% savings figure relative to product value would not be robust.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and introduction: The phrase 'sufficient to offset' should be qualified with the base-case versus sensitivity range to avoid implying the result is parameter-free.
  2. [Discussion] Discussion: Adding a short comparison table to prior studies on industrial demand response (e.g., in steel or cement) would help situate the seasonal-shutdown approach.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help clarify the presentation of our modeling approach and the robustness of our quantitative findings. We respond to each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will undertake.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] The system model that produces the headline 23-32 billion CNY/year net savings is described at a high level only; key parameters for smelter shutdown feasibility, maintenance/storage costs, and the valuation of avoided winter peaks are not fully specified or validated against operational data. Because the central claim is that these savings exceed incremental overcapacity costs, insufficient documentation of the model structure and data sources undermines verifiability of the net-benefit result.

    Authors: We agree that the main-text description of the electricity-system optimization model is high-level. In the revised manuscript we will expand the Methods section to include a summary of the model structure (linear optimization of generation, transmission, and storage under seasonal demand and renewable profiles), explicit parameter values for smelter shutdown feasibility (technical minimum downtime and restart constraints), maintenance and storage costs (drawn from published Chinese aluminum-industry benchmarks), and the valuation of avoided winter peaks (marginal cost of additional peaking capacity). We will also add a brief discussion of data sources and note that, while feasibility assumptions are informed by historical smelter responses to price and demand signals, large-scale seasonal shutdowns remain a proposed paradigm whose operational validation would benefit from future empirical studies. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] The reported cost savings are presented as the difference between electricity-system cost reduction and incremental overcapacity costs, yet no sensitivity analysis is shown for plausible increases in unmodeled disruption or supply-chain costs. If these parameters are optimistic, the 11-15% savings figure relative to product value would not be robust.

    Authors: We accept that the absence of sensitivity analysis on unmodeled disruption and supply-chain costs limits the demonstrated robustness of the net-benefit result. We will add a dedicated sensitivity subsection to the Results, testing increases of 30 % and 50 % in these costs relative to our central estimates. The revised analysis will show that the 23–32 billion CNY annual net savings remain positive across the tested range and continue to represent 8–12 % of industry product value under the more conservative assumptions, thereby addressing the concern about optimism in the headline figures. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained in system model outputs

full rationale

The paper derives its central cost savings estimate (23-32 billion CNY/year) from a system-level optimization model comparing scenarios with and without seasonal smelter operation. No equations or steps reduce by construction to fitted inputs, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations; the feasibility assumptions and cost offsets are stated as modeling choices whose validity is external to the derivation itself. The result is presented as an output of the model rather than a renaming or tautology, making the chain independent of its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the cost-benefit analysis likely relies on standard energy system modeling assumptions not detailed here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 7450 in / 1172 out tokens · 69971 ms · 2026-05-17T04:39:15.933451+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    L. Tan, Z. Yang, M. Irfan, C. J. Ding, M. Hu, J. Hu, Toward low-carbon sustainable development: Exploring the impact of digital economy devel- opment and industrial restructuring, Bus. Strategy Environ. 33 (2024) 2159–2172

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    B. Xie, C. Yang, W. Song, L. Song, H. Wang, The impact of envi- ronmental regulation on capacity utilization of china’s manufacturing 22 industry: An empirical research based on the sector level, Ecol. Indic. 148 (2023) 110085

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Y. Li, Q. Yue, J. He, F. Zhao, H. Wang, When will the arrival of China’s secondary aluminum era?, Resour. Policy 65 (2020) 101573

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    B. Yu, C. Shen, Environmental regulation and industrial capacity uti- lization: An empirical study of china, J. Clean. Prod. 246 (2020) 118986

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    J. Guo, H. Dong, H. Farzaneh, Y. Geng, C. L. Reddington, Uncovering the overcapacity feature of china’s industry and the environmental & health co-benefits from de-capacity, J. Environ. Manage. 308 (2022) 114645

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    W. J. Cole, D. Greer, P. Denholm, A. W. Frazier, S. Machen, T. Mai, N. Vincent, S. F. Baldwin, Quantifying the challenge of reaching a 100% renewable energy power system for the United States, Joule 5 (2021) 1732–1748

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    J. D. Jenkins, N. A. Sepulveda, Long-duration energy storage: A blueprint for research and innovation, Joule 5 (2021) 2241–2246

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    H. Wei, M. Ma, H. Jiang, T. Capuder, F. Teng, G. Strbac, J. Zhang, N. Zhang, C. Kang, Generation and transmission expansion planning in- corporating economically feasible heterogeneous demand-side resources, Appl. Energy 381 (2025) 125067

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Golmohamadi, Demand-side management in industrial sector: A review of heavy industries, Renew

    H. Golmohamadi, Demand-side management in industrial sector: A review of heavy industries, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 156 (2022) 111963

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    N. A. Sepulveda, J. D. Jenkins, F. J. De Sisternes, R. K. Lester, The Role of Firm Low-Carbon Electricity Resources in Deep Decarbonization of Power Generation, Joule 2 (2018) 2403–2420

    work page 2018

  11. [11]

    Van Heerden, O

    R. Van Heerden, O. Y. Edelenbosch, V. Daioglou, T. Le Gallic, L. B. Baptista, A. Di Bella, F. P. Colelli, J. Emmerling, P. Fragkos, R. Hasse, J. Hoppe, P. Kishimoto, F. Leblanc, J. Lef` evre, G. Lud- erer, G. Marangoni, A. Mastrucci, H. Pettifor, R. Pietzcker, P. Rochedo, 23 B. Van Ruijven, R. Schaeffer, C. Wilson, S. Yeh, E. Zisarou, D. Van Vu- uren, Dem...

    work page 2050

  12. [12]

    Bistline, Variability in deeply decarbonized electricity systems, En- vironmental Science & Technology 55 (2021) 5629–5635

    J. Bistline, Variability in deeply decarbonized electricity systems, En- vironmental Science & Technology 55 (2021) 5629–5635

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    URL: https://www.chalco.com.cn/tzzgx/yjbg/ndbg/ 202104/P020210420669662364743.pdf, accessed: 2025-09-10

    Aluminum Corporation of China Limited, 2020 Annual Report, Tech- nical Report, Chinalco Finance and Asset Department (Board of Direc- tors Office), 2021. URL: https://www.chalco.com.cn/tzzgx/yjbg/ndbg/ 202104/P020210420669662364743.pdf, accessed: 2025-09-10

    work page 2020

  14. [14]

    L. Song, S. Van Ewijk, E. Masanet, T. Watari, F. Meng, J. M. Cullen, Z. Cao, W.-Q. Chen, China’s bulk material loops can be closed but deep decarbonization requires demand reduction, Nat. Clim. Chang. 13 (2023) 1136–1143

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    Eheliyagoda, J

    D. Eheliyagoda, J. Li, Y. Geng, X. Zeng, The role of china’s aluminum recycling on sustainable resource and emission pathways, Resour. Policy 76 (2022) 102552

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    D. Todd, M. Caufield, B. Helms, A. P. Generating, I. M. Starke, B. Kirby, J. Kueck, Providing reliability services through demand re- sponse: A preliminary evaluation of the demand response capabilities of alcoa inc, ORNL/TM 233 (2008) 1–52

    work page 2008

  17. [17]

    C.-J. Wong, J. Bao, M. Skyllas-Kazacos, B. Welch, M. Mahmoud, A. Arkhipov, N. Ahli, Studies on Power Modulation of Aluminum Smelt- ing Cells Based on a Discretized Mass and Thermal Dynamic Model, Metall. Mater. Trans. B 54 (2023) 562–577

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    A. T. Tabereaux, Loss in Cathode Life Resulting from the Shutdown and Restart of Potlines at Aluminum Smelters, in: G. Bearne, M. Dupuis, G. Tarcy (Eds.), Essential Readings in Light Metals: Volume 2 Alu- minum Reduction Technology, Cham, 2016, pp. 723–728

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    K. J. Driscoll, The Economics of Shutting and Restarting Primary Alu- minium Smelting Capacity, in: G. Bearne, M. Dupuis, G. Tarcy (Eds.), Essential Readings in Light Metals: Volume 2 Aluminum Reduction Technology, Cham, 2016, pp. 699–706. 24

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    Y. Shen, R. Lyu, H. Guo, C. Kang, An Improved Modeling Method for Electrolyte Aluminum Loads Considering Thermal Balance and Flexible Regulation Cost, in: 2025 IEEE International Conference on Power Systems and Smart Grid Technologies (PSSGT), 2025, pp. 331–337

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    R. Lyu, H. Guo, G. Strbac, C. Kang, Data-Driven Dimension Reduction for Industrial Load Modeling Using Inverse Optimization, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 16 (2025) 2695–2698

    work page 2025

  22. [22]

    Xueen, W

    H. Xueen, W. Xinshe, W. Jianpei, The silver declaration on baiyinpo: The record of the secondary startup of the electrolysis cell of luoyang yugang longquan aluminum co., ltd., China’s Nonferr. Met. 15 (2009) 54–57

    work page 2009

  23. [23]

    Lazzaro, High costs challenge smelter responses to alu- minum oversupply: Alcoa, 2020

    N. Lazzaro, High costs challenge smelter responses to alu- minum oversupply: Alcoa, 2020. URL: https://www.spglobal. com/commodity-insights/en/news-research/latest-news/metals/ 051420-high-costs-challenge-smelter-responses-to-aluminum-oversupply-alcoa

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Coyne, Alcoa to restart 268,000 mt/year of aluminum smelting capacity in Brazil: company, 2021

    J. Coyne, Alcoa to restart 268,000 mt/year of aluminum smelting capacity in Brazil: company, 2021. URL: https://www.spglobal. com/commodity-insights/en/news-research/latest-news/metals/ 092021-alcoa-to-restart-268000-mtyear-of-aluminum-smelting-capacity-in-brazil-company

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    URL: https://www.foundry.com

    China Nonferrous Metals News, China’s Recycled Aluminium Output Exceeds 10 Million Tons in 2024, 2025. URL: https://www.foundry.com. cn/lists/detail/a id/2158/cate id/2158/nav id/1.html, accessed: 2025- 09-10

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    X. Zhou, K. Strunz, T. Brown, H. Sun, F. Neumann, Multi-energy sys- tem horizon planning: Early decarbonisation in China avoids stranded assets, Energy Internet 1 (2024) 81–98

    work page 2024

  27. [27]

    S. Li, T. Zhang, L. Niu, Q. Yue, Analysis of the development scenarios and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in China’s aluminum industry till 2030, J. Clean. Prod. 290 (2021) 125859

    work page 2030

  28. [28]

    T. Peng, L. Ren, E. Du, X. Ou, X. Yan, Life Cycle Energy Consump- tion and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis of Primary and Recycled Aluminum in China, Processes 10 (2022) 2299. 25

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    URL: https://www.aluminum.org/sites/default/files/ 2024-12/FINAL-2024 Aluminum-Can-KPI-Report.pdf, accessed: 2025- 09-10

    The Aluminum Association, Key Sustainability Performance Indica- tors for the Aluminum Can, Technical Report, The Aluminum As- sociation, 2024. URL: https://www.aluminum.org/sites/default/files/ 2024-12/FINAL-2024 Aluminum-Can-KPI-Report.pdf, accessed: 2025- 09-10

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    Hatayama, I

    H. Hatayama, I. Daigo, Y. Matsuno, Y. Adachi, Evolution of aluminum recycling initiated by the introduction of next-generation vehicles and scrap sorting technology, Resources, Conservation and Recycling 66 (2012) 8–14

    work page 2012

  31. [31]

    C. Tan, X. Yu, D. Li, T. Lei, Q. Hao, D. Guan, Different technology packages for aluminium smelters worldwide to deliver the 1.5°C target, Nat. Clim. Chang. 15 (2025) 51–58

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Lukin, R

    M. Lukin, R. Jeltsch, Reduction Cell Restart Method Influence on Cell Life Evolution, in: B. A. Sadler (Ed.), Light Metals 2013, Cham, 2016, pp. 719–724

    work page 2013

  33. [33]

    L. Song, P. Wang, M. Hao, M. Dai, K. Xiang, N. Li, W.-Q. Chen, Mapping provincial steel stocks and flows in China: 1978-2050, J. Clean. Prod. 262 (2020) 121393

    work page 1978

  34. [34]

    S. Li, Z. Wang, Q. Yue, T. Zhang, Analysis of the quantity and spatial characterization of aluminum in-use stocks in China, Resour. Policy 79 (2022) 102979

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    Farid, H

    C. Farid, H. Luo, A. Gunawan, A. Pascale, E. Larson, EnergyPATH- WAYS Model User Guide, Revision 1, Technical Report, Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment, Princeton University, 2024. Accessed: 2025-09-16

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Larson, Net-zero America: Potential pathways, infrastructure, and impacts, Princeton University, 2020

    E. Larson, Net-zero America: Potential pathways, infrastructure, and impacts, Princeton University, 2020

    work page 2020

  37. [37]

    Davis, A

    D. Davis, A. Pascale, A. Vecchi, B. Bharadwaj, R. Jones, T. Strawhorn, M. Tabatabaei, M. Lopez Peralta, Y. Zhang, J. Beiraghi, et al., Mod- elling summary report, Net Zero Australia, 2023. 26

    work page 2023

  38. [38]

    Y. Chen, F. Guo, J. Wang, W. Cai, C. Wang, K. Wang, Provincial and gridded population projection for China under shared socioeconomic pathways from 2010 to 2100, Sci. Data 7 (2020) 83

    work page 2010

  39. [39]

    H. A. Øye, M. Sørlie, Power failure, restart and repair, Alum. Int. Today (2011)

    work page 2011

  40. [40]

    H. A. Øye, POWER FAILURE, TEMPORARY POT SHUT-DOWN, RESTART AND REPAIR, 27th Int. Alum. Conf. (2011)

    work page 2011

  41. [41]

    R. K. SMITH, Analysis of hourly generation patterns at large coal-fired units and implications of transitioning from baseload to load-following electricity supplier, J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 7 (2019) 468–474

    work page 2019

  42. [42]

    Published: March 11, 2024

    Colliers, Map of Logistics and Warehouse Market Rental Prices in China for the Second Half of 2023, Colliers official website, 2024. Published: March 11, 2024. Retrieved from https://www.colliers.com.cn/zh-cn/ research/20240312logisticsrental. Accessed: 2025-09-10

    work page arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    F. Yang, X. Yang, X. Li, China’s diverse energy transition pathways toward carbon neutrality by 2060, Sustain. Prod. Consum. 47 (2024) 236–250

    work page 2060

  44. [44]

    J. Liu, T. Wang, Y. Wang, X. Lin, R. Zhou, K. Wang, China’s 1+N policy system supports an earlier peak in carbon emissions, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 215 (2025) 115626

    work page 2025

  45. [45]

    PyPSA: Python for Power System Analysis

    T. Brown, J. H¨ orsch, D. Schlachtberger, PyPSA: Python for Power System Analysis, J. Open Res. Softw. 6 (2018).arXiv:1707.09913

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  46. [46]

    Lennon, The aluminium demand risk of terawatt photovoltaics for net zero emissions by 2050, Nat

    A. Lennon, The aluminium demand risk of terawatt photovoltaics for net zero emissions by 2050, Nat. Sustain. 5 (2022)

    work page 2050

  47. [47]

    Y. Yang, H. Zhang, L. Wu, M. Wang, Supply potential, carbon emission reduction, energy conservation, and sustainable pathways for aluminum recycling in China, Sustain. Prod. Consum. 50 (2024) 239–252

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    A. Shen, J. Zhang, Technologies for CO2 emission reduction and low- carbon development in primary aluminum industry in China: A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 189 (2024) 113965. 27

    work page 2024

  49. [49]

    International Aluminium Institute, Primary Aluminium Smelting Power Consumption, Technical Report, International Aluminium Institute,

    work page

  50. [50]

    Accessed: 2025-09-10

    work page 2025

  51. [51]

    Hasanbeigi, C

    A. Hasanbeigi, C. Springer, How Clean Is the U.S. Steel Industry?, 2019. URL: http://www.globalefficiencyintel.com/ us-steel-industry-benchmarking-energy-co2intensities, accessed: 2025- 09-10. Acknowledgment The authors would like to thank Eric Larson for reviewing the paper, Jiaxiang Zhang, Xicheng Cha, Jiarui Li, and Yingrui Zhang for their assis- tance...

    work page 2019