In Zhongwei, Ningxia, a 500,000 kW photovoltaic power station went into operation in May 2026. The electricity it generates does not enter the public grid; instead, it is delivered directly to a data center via a dedicated line. The delivered electricity price is 0.36 RMB/kWh, approximately half of the electricity price in eastern coastal areas. According to public reports, the China Mobile computing power team estimates that this single project can save the enterprise approximately 100 million RMB in electricity costs annually.

This is not an isolated case. In May 2026, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the National Energy Administration (NEA) issued the “Notice on Orderly Promoting the Development of Multi-User Direct Green Power Connection” (Fa Gai Neng Yuan [2026] No. 688), expanding direct green power connection from single users to multiple users. Industrial parks and zero-carbon parks can now set up lines to utilize green power.

This article aims to clarify three points: what direct green power connection actually is, how policies have opened up step-by-step, and how enterprises should calculate the accounts—both the cost ledger and the carbon ledger.

01 Clarifying the Concept: What is Direct Green Power Connection?

In short: New energy power stations (wind, solar, biomass) bypass the public grid and use a dedicated line and substation facilities to deliver electricity directly to one or more nearby enterprises.

However, it is not equivalent to three things. It is not rooftop distributed PV for self-consumption—which is typically small-scale and covers only a single plant area. It is not green power trading—where electricity still travels through physical grid channels and relies on Green Electricity Certificates (GECs) for certification, whereas direct connection is a physical dedicated line for direct supply. Furthermore, it is not the illegal private installation of power lines—it has a clear policy basis, metering and settlement methods, responsibility interfaces, and safety supervision requirements.

The key to understanding it is transforming the geographical coincidence of a power plant being next door into an institutional arrangement. Document No. 650 of 2025 only allowed a single enterprise to enjoy a dedicated line; Document No. 688 of 2026 expanded this scope to allow multiple different legal entities to share a line (excluding residential and agricultural users), categorized into grid-connected types (integrated into the public grid with clear responsibility interfaces) and off-grid types (completely disconnected from the grid).

02 Policy Evolution: Three Documents Opening a Door

The transition of direct green power connection from breaking the ice to full-scale promotion relied on three key documents.

The first, issued in May 2025, is Fa Gai Neng Yuan [2025] No. 650, “Notice on Orderly Promoting the Development of Direct Green Power Connection.” This was the first top-level domestic document for direct green power connection, allowing new energy power stations to pull dedicated lines to supply a single enterprise. It established two hard rules: first, load-based source determination—the annual self-consumption volume must account for no less than 60% of the total available generation and no less than 30% of the total electricity consumption, meaning the load must exist before the power source is allocated; second, projects must not have electricity purchased by grid enterprises as agents, and they must reasonably pay transmission and distribution fees, system operation fees, policy-based cross-subsidies, and government funds and surcharges.

The second, issued in September 2025, is Fa Gai Jia Ge [2025] No. 1192, “Notice on Improving Price Mechanisms to Promote Local Consumption of New Energy Power Generation.” It clarified the accounting: local consumption projects pay transmission and distribution fees based on capacity (demand), and grid-drawn electricity no longer incurs system standby fees or transmission/distribution volume-based electricity charges. Costs for ensuring stable supply are borne fairly according to the principle of “whoever benefits, bears the burden”—making the cost structure of direct connection projects predictable.

The third, issued in May 2026, is Fa Gai Neng Yuan [2026] No. 688, “Notice on Orderly Promoting the Development of Multi-User Direct Green Power Connection.” Direct green power connection was upgraded from single-user to multi-user: all or part of the load in industrial parks, zero-carbon parks, and incremental distribution networks can access new energy locally. Enterprises with green power consumption needs (including key energy-using and carbon-emitting enterprises, and export-oriented enterprises with decarbonization needs) can carry this out as a group. Priority support is given to emerging industries such as computing power facilities and green hydrogen, ammonia, and alcohol. Furthermore, a closed loop for hour-level green power traceability and GEC issuance, transfer, and cancellation has been established.

The logic of these three documents follows a single line: first solving whether it can be built (Document 650), then solving how to calculate the money (Document 1192), and finally solving how to certify green power and who can use it together (Document 688).

03 Mechanism Breakdown: How a Dedicated Line Operates

To understand direct green power connection, one does not need to memorize many technical terms; remembering four stages is sufficient.

Who does it? The project must have a primary responsible entity, which in principle is a joint venture between the power source party and the load party, or can be invested in by one party alone. The park model can be established by the park management committee or a third-party institution (excluding public grid enterprises). Dedicated lines, substation facilities, energy storage, and operation platforms are, in principle, invested in and constructed by the primary responsible entity—this represents the first major investment in direct green power connection.

How is electricity calculated? Load-based source determination is the general principle: a confirmed electricity load must exist before supporting new energy power sources are built. There are three mandatory ratios: annual self-consumption must be no less than 60% of total available generation; it must be no less than 30% of total electricity consumption (increasing to 35% by 2030); and for grid-connected projects, the annual grid-fed electricity volume should, in principle, not exceed 20% of total available generation. Simply put, the policy requires projects to consume most of the electricity themselves rather than reselling it to the grid under the guise of direct connection.

How are fees charged? Grid-connected projects must fairly bear transmission and distribution fees, system operation fees, and policy-based cross-subsidies, and pay government funds and surcharges according to regulations. However, after paying transmission and distribution fees based on capacity, grid-drawn electricity no longer incurs system standby fees or transmission/distribution volume-based charges. Projects must not have electricity purchased by grid enterprises as agents; they participate in the electricity market as a whole, initially entering the electricity spot market by reporting volume without bidding prices.

How is it traced? Internal sub-metering is used within the project, and the self-consumption volume for each user is determined based on the proportion of electricity consumption in each time period, achieving hour-level matching between new energy generation and consumption. GECs are issued, transferred, and cancelled based on the self-consumption volume. This means every kilowatt-hour of direct green power used by an enterprise can be traced back to a specific generation time and unit.

04 The Cost Ledger: How Much Can Enterprises Actually Save?

The cost-saving logic of direct connection is an aggregation of four factors: the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for new energy is already lower than that of coal power; local direct supply eliminates long-distance transmission and distribution stages; paying transmission and distribution fees based on capacity means the higher the consumption, the lower the unit allocation; and bypassing grid agency purchasing removes a layer of middleman markups. However, the amount saved depends on the actual project.

Several disclosed cases can serve as benchmarks:

Zhongwei, Ningxia, Datang 500,000 kW Photovoltaic-Computing Synergy Project (commissioned May 2026): The direct green power price to the doorstep is 0.36 RMB/kWh, approximately 45% of the average electricity price in eastern coastal areas, with estimated annual savings of about 100 million RMB according to public reports.

Guangdong’s first inter-provincial point-to-point green power transaction (May 2026): 9 data centers purchased 17.45 million kWh of green power at a landed price of approximately 0.40 RMB/kWh, nearly 0.13 RMB cheaper per unit than similar transactions within the province.

Qingyang Computing-Electricity Synergy Park, Gansu: 55% of the park’s electricity is supplied directly by local wind and solar. From January to May 2026, it saved resident enterprises over 13 million RMB in electricity costs, with the annual cost reduction expected to exceed 30 million RMB.

Chicheng Computing Power Base, Hebei: The estimated comprehensive electricity price can be controlled below 0.45 RMB/kWh, with long-term potential to drop to 0.39–0.43 RMB, whereas large industrial electricity prices in Beijing’s core areas range from 0.6 to 0.8 RMB.

Xinjiang Shenhuo Coal & Power Electrolytic Aluminum Workshop: Electricity costs account for over 30% of electrolytic aluminum costs. Stable direct green power supply directly lowers comprehensive electricity costs, allowing green aluminum products to gain a premium in international markets.

However, a reminder: the cost-saving account cannot only calculate the electricity price. Dedicated lines, substation facilities, and energy storage are significant capital expenditures; transmission and distribution fees, system operation fees, and cross-subsidies remain mandatory. The load curve must match the power source output; otherwise, electricity will either be curtailed or supplementary purchases will be required. The cost ledger must be calculated over the project’s entire life cycle.

05 The Carbon Ledger: How Direct Green Power Connection Affects Energy Saving and Decarbonization

If the cost ledger determines whether to do it, the carbon ledger determines if it is worth it after implementation. The significance of direct green power connection for energy saving and decarbonization can be broken down into four lines.

First, Scope 2 emissions can be zeroed out. Indirect emissions from purchased electricity (Scope 2) represent the bulk of carbon emissions for many manufacturing enterprises. Direct green power is physically supplied by new energy, and combined with hour-level traceability, the carbon emission accounting for corporate electricity use can clearly decrease, even approaching zero.

Second, it provides a lever for carbon accounting and carbon markets. For key emission units included in national or local carbon markets, the accounting of indirect electricity emissions is the basis for compliance. Direct connection projects come with sub-metering and a GEC closed loop, making data auditable and traceable, avoiding disputes over the difficulty of tracing purchased green power certificates.

Third, it addresses international green trade barriers. The entities specifically supported by Document 688 are export-oriented enterprises and their upstream/downstream partners with decarbonization needs. The EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), the Battery Regulation, the RE100 initiative, and Science Based Targets (SBTi) are all increasing requirements for green power consumption ratios and traceability. Physical direct supply + GECs is currently the most robust proof of green electricity.

Fourth, it improves new energy utilization efficiency. Direct connection projects require energy storage and source-load coordinated regulation. Curtailed new energy is not included in utilization rate statistics, converting wind and solar power that might otherwise be wasted into corporate output value locally, while reducing peak-shaving pressure on the public grid.

06 Three Common Misconceptions to Eliminate First

Misconception 1: Direct green power connection equals zero-cost electricity. This statement is incorrect as it only looks at the cheap electricity price and ignores the complete bill. Direct connection projects must bear transmission and distribution fees, system operation fees, and policy-based cross-subsidies, and pay government funds and surcharges; they also require investment in dedicated lines, substation facilities, and energy storage. What is saved are the intermediate stages and market-based price differences, not the cost of electricity itself.

Misconception 2: Direct green power connection is just pulling a wire yourself. Pulling a wire is only the surface; compliance is the core. Projects must be included in provincial new energy power generation development and construction plans, a primary responsible entity must be established, bidirectional time-of-use metering devices must be installed, unified dispatch management must be accepted, and safety responsibilities must be clarified and reported. Bypassing metering devices to use electricity is a strictly prohibited illegal and non-compliant act.

Misconception 3: Having GECs is enough; direct connection is unnecessary. GECs solve the certification of environmental attributes, while direct connection solves physical power supply and cost reduction; the two are not substitutes. Direct connection projects come with GEC issuance while adding the dual effects of cost savings and traceability. For industries sensitive to electricity costs and carbon accounts, the attraction of direct connection is significantly greater.

07 Decision Framework: Four Questions for Enterprises Considering Adoption

Question 1: Is the load large and stable enough? The red line for the self-consumption ratio is clear (no less than 30% of total electricity consumption, 35% by 2030). For projects where the electricity consumption curve and power source output do not match, the economic account will be very poor due to either curtailed electricity or the need to spend more on purchasing power.

Question 2: Are there new energy resources nearby? The core of direct connection is proximity. The endowment of wind and solar resources, available land, and grid connection conditions determine whether the project has a physical foundation.

Question 3: Does the electricity cost account for a high proportion of total costs? Electricity costs for data centers account for about 60% to 70% of total operating costs, and over 30% for electrolytic aluminum—the higher the proportion, the greater the cost-reduction elasticity of direct connection.

Question 4: Is there a hard demand for green power consumption? Export certification, carbon market compliance, ESG ratings, and major customer supply chain requirements will all transform green power from a bonus into a necessity.

If the answer to all four questions is yes, it is worth conducting serious calculations and preliminary demonstrations. If two to three are yes, you can track provincial implementation rules and plan for an opportune time. If none apply, it is not too late to wait and see.

08 Boundaries and Observation Points

What is certain currently is that policy has paved the way: from single-user to multi-user, and from whether it can be built to how to calculate costs and certify green power, an institutional framework is in place. However, actual implementation depends on several factors: provincial implementation rules (how proximity distance, grid-fed electricity ratios, and exit mechanisms are refined), the actual efficiency of grid connection, the investment return cycle for dedicated lines, and the pricing of direct connection projects by the electricity spot market.

Conclusion

For most enterprises, direct green power connection is not a model that can be used tomorrow, but an option worth including in a three-to-five-year energy strategic plan. It saves money, accounts for carbon, and bets on the direction of new energy consumption and electricity marketization reforms.

When a kilowatt-hour of electricity can save money, reduce carbon, and become a green pass for exports, an enterprise’s energy choice is no longer just a procurement issue, but a strategic one.

ORISEEN Insights: In-Depth Interpretation of the Direct Green Power Connection Model最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。

Hello, we are Changzhou Yuanjian Energy Technology Co., Ltd.—your energy and carbon management consultants.

Through this article, we would like to formally introduce ourselves—the roles we play on the long track of Dual Carbon and how we can serve you.

Let’s use an analogy. Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutrality are not a hundred-meter sprint, but a super marathon. In this long-distance race, every manufacturing enterprise is an athlete at the starting line—some have finished warming up and are ready to go, while others are still looking around: Where is the track? How should the pace be set? Where are the supply stations?

We are not spectators applauding at the finish line, nor are we cheerleaders on the sidelines. We are fellow travelers in this team who constantly switch identities based on your stage:

When you don’t know where to start, we are the ‘Pacer’ leading the way; once you are on track and running independently, we are the ‘Companion’ walking beside you; when you are mature and experienced, we are the ‘Guardian’ supporting you from behind.

One identity corresponds to one stage; three roles span the entire life cycle of your green transformation. Next, I will explain each one to you.

I. The ‘Pacer’ at the Starting Line: When You Don’t Know Where to Run

▲ Pacer: Helping you scout the track and define the route

When many companies first hear about ‘Dual Carbon,’ their reaction is the same: they have heard of it but have no idea where to start. How are carbon emissions calculated? Which links are the priorities? Where are the policy red lines? What is the ROI? A series of question marks keeps you from taking the first step at the starting line.

At this time, our role is the ‘Pacer.’ The value of a pacer is not to run for you, but to use professional expertise to help you scout the track, define the route, and teach you methods, transforming you from ‘not knowing how to run’ to ‘knowing where and how to run.’

1. Carbon Baseline Inventory: First, helping you perform a “comprehensive physical exam“

Just as a marathon runner undergoes a comprehensive physical exam before a race, your first step is to understand your carbon emission assets. Based on national greenhouse gas emission accounting standards, we cover Scope 1 (direct emissions), Scope 2 (purchased electricity and heat), and key Scope 3 (upstream and downstream indirect emissions). We perform comprehensive data collection and accounting for the enterprise’s energy consumption structure, production processes, and logistics links to draw your first panoramic carbon emission portrait.

This is the first time you will receive an authoritative and complete carbon emission report—covering total volume, intensity, structure, and trends. From then on, you will have a clear understanding and no longer be ‘feeling the elephant in the dark.’

2. Carbon Heat Map Analysis: Precisely locating “energy-consuming pain points“

Knowing the total volume is not enough; you also need to know where the problems lie. Through our self-developed carbon flow analysis model, we precisely locate the ‘hot spots’ of your carbon emissions: Which links consume the most energy? Which processes have the lowest carbon efficiency? Which equipment has outdated energy efficiency? Ultimately, a visualized carbon emission heat map is formed, making problems clear at a glance.

The pacer’s vision is to point out where the slopes, hurdles, and shortcuts are before you even notice them yourself.

3. Carbon Reduction Path Planning: Customizing a “pacing plan“ for you

After understanding the baseline and identifying the pain points, the next step is to prescribe a solution. Combining industry best practices and cutting-edge technical routes, we tailor a ‘one enterprise, one policy’ energy-saving and carbon-reduction action plan for you, covering three levels:

Short-term quick-win measures—achieving 5% to 10% ‘zero-cost’ or ‘low-cost’ rapid cost reduction through management optimization and simple technical retrofitting; medium-term technical transformation—implementing systematic technical retrofitting for high-energy-consuming links to release 15% to 30% of energy-saving and carbon-reduction potential; long-term strategic transformation—building long-term competitiveness around low-carbon products, clean energy, and green supply chains.

This plan is your ‘pacing chart’—clearly outlining how to run the first 5 kilometers, how to distribute energy midway, and how to exert force during the sprint phase.

4. Policy and Compliance Navigation: Helping you see the “track rules“ clearly

Rules on the Dual Carbon track are tightening rapidly: carbon quota management, the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), supply chain carbon footprint disclosure… enterprises that do not implement carbon management will face significant compliance risks in the next 2 to 3 years. Our professional team (Registered Energy Managers, Carbon Auditors, and Industry Engineers) continuously tracks policy dynamics at national, provincial, and municipal levels to interpret rules and warn of risks, ensuring you stay on the right track without deviating or crossing lines.

The Pacer’s mission: To take you from ‘not daring to run’ to ‘daring to start,’ and from ‘not knowing how to run’ to ‘running with skill.’

II. The ‘Companion’ En Route: When You Are Already on Track

▲ Companion: Walking side by side to help you pocket the dividends

After the initial diagnosis and planning, you have completed the first batch of energy-saving and carbon-reduction retrofits, the energy and carbon management system is initially established, and the operations team has begun to master daily management methods—you are now able to run independently.

At this stage, we move from the front to your side, switching our identity to ‘Companion.’ The companion does not make decisions for you but always walks side by side: you run the main body, and we fill the gaps; when you encounter bottlenecks, we provide support; when you have doubts, we respond immediately.

1. Technical Retrofitting Implementation Support: Turning “blueprints“ into “results“

No matter how well a carbon reduction plan is written, it is just a piece of paper if it cannot be implemented. We accompany you throughout the technical transformation process: from equipment selection and plan comparison to construction supervision and effect verification, ensuring every technical retrofit is implemented as planned and achieves expected results. We promise to deliver not a report to be shelved, but a set of actionable, quantifiable, and traceable action plans.

2. Digital Platform Dynamic Monitoring: Letting you “view data while running“

Our self-developed carbon diagnosis digital platform provides real-time collection, dynamic monitoring, and intelligent analysis of carbon emission data. You no longer ‘settle the accounts once at the end of the year’; instead, you can view carbon emission fluctuations, energy efficiency changes, and target progress at any time—just like a sports watch on an athlete’s wrist, with pace, heart rate, and mileage visible in real-time to adjust your rhythm.

3. Policy Project Application Support: Helping you “dividends“ pocket the

Green transformation involves not only investment but also tangible policy returns. We accompany you in step-by-step applications for policy projects at all levels, transforming your carbon reduction actions into real financial support:

At the municipal level, Changzhou’s near-zero carbon factories receive up to 500,000 RMB, energy-saving technical transformation projects up to 2 million RMB, and circular economy projects up to 2 million RMB; at the provincial level, Jiangsu’s zero-carbon factories receive 2 million RMB each, near-zero carbon factories 1.5 million RMB each, Dual Carbon technological innovation special funds range from 5 to 10 million RMB, and Environmental Infrastructure Loans for green technical retrofitting offer a 1.5% interest subsidy; at the national level, subsidies for National Green Factories, National Zero-Carbon Factory construction projects, and energy-saving carbon-reduction transformation projects in key industries are verified at 20% of the total investment.

From the preparation of application materials and on-site defense to project acceptance, we follow up throughout the process, allowing you to focus on running while leaving the ‘supply collection’ to us.

4. Certification and Rating Guidance: Helping you obtain the “Green Passport“

Carbon emission data is becoming a ‘Green Passport’ for enterprises to participate in global supply chain competition. Leading companies such as Apple, Tesla, and CATL have put forward clear carbon neutrality requirements for their supply chains. We guide you through certifications for Green Factories and Zero-Carbon Factories, making your green transformation results a competitive advantage in bidding, financing, and brand communication.

The Companion’s mission: When you can run, we don’t steal the spotlight; when you can’t, we give you a lift. We walk side by side until you form your own ‘muscle memory.’

III. The ‘Guardian’ Behind You: When You Are Already Experienced

▲ Guardian: You just focus on running at full speed; we handle everything in the rear

When your energy and carbon management system is operating maturely, your team is proficient in daily work, and carbon reduction targets are progressing steadily—you are already an experienced and mature runner.

At this stage, we move from your side to behind you, switching our identity to ‘Guardian.’ The guardian does not interfere with your running rhythm but provides logistics support and technical backing: Is the data accurate? Is the system stable? Has the policy changed? What to do in an emergency? Leave these ‘rear-end’ matters to us.

1. Regular Review and Data Calibration: Ensuring “results“ are authentic and valid

We provide regular carbon inventory review services, performing annual updates, cross-validation, and quality audits of carbon emission data to ensure your data remains accurate, traceable, and verifiable. Meanwhile, we timely update carbon baselines and reduction paths based on changes in production capacity, process adjustments, and energy structure upgrades, ensuring your ‘report card’ is always authentic and valid.

2. Digital Platform O&M and Technical After-sales: Ensuring stable operation of “equipment“

Continuous operation and maintenance, functional upgrades, and data security assurance of the self-developed carbon diagnosis digital platform are the basic after-sales services we provide to mature enterprises. Rapid response to system failures, data interface docking, and on-demand expansion of new modules ensure your energy and carbon management ‘equipment’ is always online and stable, preventing technical issues from slowing down your pace.

1. Policy Dynamic Tracking and Early Warning: Helping you “see the weather ahead“

Dual Carbon policies are still being released intensively, with tightening carbon quotas, expanding carbon tariffs, and updated industry standards… any change could affect your running strategy. We continuously track national and local policy dynamics, providing you with policy warnings and impact assessments so you can adjust your pace in advance and avoid rhythm disruptions caused by ‘sudden weather changes.’

4. Carbon Asset Optimization and Supply Chain Extension: Helping you “run further“

For mature enterprises, we also provide carbon asset management optimization suggestions (such as carbon quota compliance strategies and carbon credit development consulting) and support you in extending energy and carbon management to the upstream and downstream of the supply chain—helping core suppliers carry out carbon inventories and promoting product carbon footprint accounting, allowing your green influence to expand from ‘yourself’ to the ‘entire chain,’ building more lasting competitive barriers in the long run.

5. Emergency Technical Response: We arrive immediately when you “cramp“

Emergencies are inevitable in energy and carbon management: urgent data correction before audits, sudden windows for policy applications, or emission abnormalities caused by equipment failure… We provide an emergency technical response channel; with one phone call, our professional team intervenes quickly to ensure problems do not escalate and your rhythm is not interrupted.

The Guardian’s mission: You just focus on running at full speed; we guard everything in the rear. You may not see us, but we are always there.

Starting with Diagnosis, Ending with Zero Carbon

From Pacer to Companion, and then to Guardian—these three roles are not three independent service packages, but a service chain that runs through the entire life cycle of your green transformation.

We take ‘Carbon Diagnosis’ as the starting point to build a full-process closed loop of ‘Diagnosis—Prescription—Treatment—Review’: In the diagnosis stage, we are the Pacer, helping you understand your assets and find the right direction; in the treatment stage, we are the Companion, accompanying you in implementing technical retrofits and securing all policies; in the review stage, we are the Guardian, guarding the rear for you to ensure steady and long-term progress.

There are no shortcuts in the Dual Carbon marathon, but there are fellow travelers.

We look forward to walking with you—from the starting line to the finish line, from the first kilometer to the last.

——Changzhou Yuanjian Energy Technology Co., Ltd.

Your Partner Throughout the Energy and Carbon Management Journey

The Dual Carbon Marathon: Who Are We? — From Pacer and Companion to Guardian, We Accompany You Throughout the Journey最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。

In September 2026, the General Office of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) issued the “Requirements for Declaration of Typical Scenarios and Cases of Green Energy Applications in the Industrial and Information Technology Fields.” Industrial green microgrids ranked first among the six collection directions. The requirements mandate the integration of unified systems including photovoltaics (PV), wind power, new energy storage, waste heat/pressure/gas, and smart energy management to achieve deep synergy of “Source-Grid-Load-Storage” and high-proportion local consumption of green electricity. The “Microgrid + Smart Management + Waste Heat/Pressure + Energy Storage” combination in this plan directly responds to this direction.
The four modules support each other: the microgrid serves as the foundation, achieving Source-Grid-Load-Storage integration (with a consumption ratio of no less than 60%); Smart Energy Management (EMS) acts as the “brain,” coordinating source-load-storage and electricity price forecasting; waste heat and pressure utilization recovers sensible heat from byproduct gases and top-pressure from furnaces for power generation or heating, with the surplus connected to energy storage; new energy storage acts as the “regulator,” providing peak-valley arbitrage and frequency/voltage regulation support. The overall scope covers the “Waste Energy Utilization + Renewable Energy Generation + New Energy Storage” model defined in the Guidelines.

II. Overview

Industrial green microgrids are integrated comprehensive energy systems designed primarily to provide green power to industrial users. They integrate PV, wind power, high-efficiency heat pumps, new energy storage, hydrogen energy, waste heat/pressure, and smart energy management. They feature four core characteristics: Source-Grid-Load-Storage integration, high-proportion renewable energy consumption, grid-friendly interaction, and digital-intelligent management. In principle, the local consumption ratio of newly built renewable energy shall not be less than 60%. In 2026, projects reached an economic tipping point: the costs of PV modules, PV systems, and energy storage have all decreased significantly, while the peak-valley price gap in Jiangsu has expanded. Consequently, the investment payback period has shortened by nearly 50%, establishing a preliminary commercial closed loop.

Figure 1: Panoramic Schematic of Industrial Green Microgrid

III. System Composition and Technical Solution

The system is centrally dispatched by a Digital Energy-Carbon Management Platform (EMS), which connects four major units: PV power generation, energy storage systems, adjustable loads, and grid interaction. Flexible power dispatch is achieved through flexible interconnection. Energy storage utilizes Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) batteries, with a total investment of approximately 2 million RMB for a 1MW/2MWh system. Investment in the EMS platform depends on the scale, generally including basic functional modules such as power generation, load, and storage management, power price forecasting, carbon management, market trading, and visualized alarms. Extended functions can be selected based on actual customer needs.

Figure 2: System Architecture of Source-Grid-Load-Storage Integrated Microgrid

IV. Four Typical Construction Scales

Categorized into four tiers based on the annual electricity consumption of applicable enterprises: Small (1MW PV + 1MW/2MWh storage, annual consumption 5–15 million kWh; for machining, light industry, electronic assembly, etc.); Medium (5MW PV + 5MW/10MWh storage, annual consumption 30–60 million kWh; for auto parts, textiles, food processing, etc.); Large (10MW PV + 10MW/20MWh storage, annual consumption 80–150 million kWh; for battery manufacturing, high-end equipment, chemicals, etc.); Ultra-Large (40MW PV + 27.6MW/80MWh storage, annual consumption over 100 million kWh; for industrial parks).

V. Investment Estimation Details

Based on 2026 Jiangsu price benchmarks: Small-scale total investment is approximately 5.5 million RMB, Medium-scale 27 million RMB, Large-scale 54 million RMB, and Ultra-Large-scale 198.2 million RMB. PV and energy storage combined account for over 90% of the total investment, forming the bulk of the costs. Investment estimates are based on mainstream market prices as of August 2026.

Figure 3: Real View of Lithium Iron Phosphate Energy Storage Station

VI. Revenue Model

Six major revenue sources: electricity savings from PV self-consumption, peak-valley arbitrage from energy storage, demand charge savings, demand response subsidies, surplus electricity fed into the grid, and green electricity certificates/carbon assets.
Various market cooperation models exist; the investment method and revenue model depend on the chosen cooperation mode. Enterprises, developers, and the power grid collaborate to implement project construction and O

VII. ROI Analysis for Different Scales

Depending on the construction scale, the investment payback period can be conservatively controlled within 5 years. For medium and large-scale projects, the payback period can even be reduced by 50%, bringing it down to approximately 2–3 years.

VIII. Sensitive Factors Determining Payback Period

The sensitive factors affecting the payback period and long-term profitability are primarily the peak-valley price gap, energy storage costs, and PV costs. The impact of energy storage cycle life, PV self-consumption rate, and O costs is relatively lower.

IX. Superimposed Policy Benefits in Jiangsu Province and Changzhou City

Applicable policies include: Changzhou City new energy storage station discharge subsidy of 0.3 RMB/kWh (for 2 consecutive years; a medium-scale 10MWh storage system receives approx. 1.04 million RMB annually), green electricity consumption subsidies up to 100,000 RMB/year, Jiangsu Province fast load response incentives, and Near-Zero Carbon/Zero Carbon Factory awards (up to 500,000 RMB at the municipal level and 2 million RMB at the provincial level). In a neutral scenario for medium-sized projects, the payback period can be further shortened by more than 10% after superimposing these policies.

X. Conclusion

Looking at the current market, industrial green microgrid construction is reaching a dual tipping point of policy and economics. The state has established it as a leading direction for green energy applications, ranking first in the MIIT’s 2026 typical scenario collection. For enterprises, it offers reduced electricity bills through PV self-consumption, cost savings via peak-valley arbitrage, and improved energy efficiency through waste heat/pressure recovery. Building an industrial green microgrid not only aligns with national policy directions but is also a pragmatic move for enterprises to reduce costs and gain tangible benefits. The policy tailwinds have arrived; early adopters will be the first to benefit.

Industrial Green Microgrid Construction Plan and ROI Analysis最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。

In July 2026, the State Council issued the “Action Plan for Carbon Peak During the 15th Five-Year Plan Period,” clearly setting mandatory targets to reduce carbon emissions per unit of GDP by 17% by 2030 compared to 2025, and to increase the share of non-fossil energy consumption to 25%. Concurrently, the “Dual Control System for Carbon Emissions” was fully implemented during the 15th Five-Year Plan period—carbon emission intensity has replaced energy consumption intensity as a binding indicator. Systems for carbon emission statistics and accounting, carbon footprint management, and comprehensive evaluation and assessment of carbon peaking are being rapidly constructed. Under this policy wave, energy-carbon management platforms have leaped from being “digital tools that are nice to have” to becoming core infrastructure for enterprises, industrial parks, and governments to advance “Dual Carbon” objectives.

However, extensive practice shows that many energy-carbon management platforms have become mere “large-screen display tools” after going online, characterized by inaccurate data, questionable accounting, and weak decision-making support, failing significantly to deliver their expected value. The reason for this lies precisely in the neglect of the following six key points during the construction process.

Point 1: The “Last Mile” of Data Collection—The Measurement System is the True Foundation

Neglected Manifestation: The vast majority of developers concentrate their budget and energy on platform software development and visual displays, while investment in underlying measurement instruments and data collection networks is severely insufficient.

Core Issue: Many old factories and industrial parks still use traditional mechanical meters and rely on manual reading, resulting in data lags of several days or even weeks. Various energy equipment for water, electricity, steam, and photovoltaic storage use different transmission protocols and data formats, creating “data silos.” Furthermore, collection granularity is coarse; with only total meter data available, it is impossible to drill down to the production line, equipment, or process level.

Deep Impact: Data collection is the lifeline of the platform. If the underlying data is missing, delayed, or biased, then no matter how advanced the algorithms or how flashy the displays are, the calculated carbon emission results will only be “beautiful errors.” The “Action Plan” explicitly requires “improving the carbon emission statistics and accounting system.” In the future, carbon emission data will be directly used for government assessments, carbon market trading, and carbon footprint certification. Data quality has upgraded from an “internal management need” to a “mandatory compliance requirement.”

Solution: Conduct a data maturity diagnosis before construction to map out measurement blind spots across the entire factory or park, and phase in smart meters and data collection gateways. Simultaneously establish a data quality verification mechanism to ensure that every data point is traceable, recalculable, and auditable.

Point 2: Carbon Accounting Cannot Use “One-Size-Fits-All Templates”—Scenario Adaptation is More Important Than Feature Stacking

Neglected Manifestation: Many platforms simply overlay carbon accounting modules onto traditional energy management systems and directly apply general industry carbon emission factor libraries. This results in statistical boundaries and calculation scopes that cannot be unified with energy data, leading to vastly different carbon emission results from the same set of energy consumption data.

Core Issue: The complexity of carbon emission accounting far exceeds that of energy statistics. Different industries, processes, and equipment exhibit significantly different carbon emission characteristics under various operating conditions. For example, the emission intensity of a boiler differs completely during full load, low load, and start-stop phases. For the same kilowatt-hour of electricity, the carbon emission factors for grid power, photovoltaic green power, and self-provided units are worlds apart. Ignoring these scenario differences means accounting results can only serve as rough references and cannot meet the precision requirements for carbon market trading, carbon audits, and product carbon footprint certification.

Deeper Issue: During the 15th Five-Year Plan period, the dual control system for carbon emissions will incorporate carbon emission indicators into local government assessments. Corporate carbon emission data will directly affect quota allocation and compliance costs. If accounting results cannot withstand third-party verification, enterprises will face compliance risks and economic losses.

Solution: Platform construction must shift from “general industry models” to “enterprise-specific models.” Accounting parameters should be dynamically adjusted based on the enterprise’s own production processes, fuel types, equipment conditions, and regional power grid carbon emission characteristics. Meanwhile, ensure that accounting formulas, factors, and intermediate processes are traceable, exportable, and recalculable, allowing enterprises to independently maintain basic configurations.

Point 3: System Integration is a “Tough Nut to Crack”—Do Not Connect Only Energy Data While Ignoring Business Data

Neglected Manifestation: Many platforms only connect to energy measurement data such as electricity, water, and gas meters, while neglecting integration with business systems like production output data, equipment operating conditions, production process parameters, and ERP financial data.

Core Issue: Without production data, it is impossible to calculate energy consumption and carbon emission intensity per unit of product. Without equipment condition data, abnormal energy consumption and carbon emission peaks cannot be identified. Without financial data, the economic benefits of carbon reduction cannot be calculated. When energy data is detached from business scenarios, it loses its anchor for management decision-making.

Furthermore, data integration between business systems like MES, ERP, and SCADA and the energy-carbon management platform often involves complex interface development and cross-departmental coordination. The technical difficulty and communication costs are often seriously underestimated. Many projects find that key systems “cannot be connected” or are “incompletely connected” only at the time of acceptance.

Solution: Include system integration in the overall planning during the project initiation stage. Define the scope, interface standards, responsible parties, and milestones for data integration with each business system. For systems that cannot be integrated temporarily, develop alternative solutions (such as manual import or intermediate table integration) and clearly include them in the acceptance criteria.

Point 4: Platforms are Not “Turnkey Projects”—Operation and Maintenance Determine Survival

Neglected Manifestation: A large number of energy-carbon management platforms lack dedicated maintenance after acceptance. Data updates stop, algorithm models degrade, and system functions sit idle, eventually turning them into “zombie systems.”

Core Issue: Unlike office automation systems, an energy-carbon management platform is not a static tool built once; it is a management system that requires continuous operation and dynamic iteration. Measurement instruments need regular calibration, accounting factors need to be updated with policies, algorithm models need to be retrained based on production changes, and reports and dashboards need continuous optimization based on management needs. All of these require ongoing human investment and operational budgets.

Solution: Platform construction must be accompanied by an annual operating budget, with clear responsibility mechanisms for instrument calibration, interface maintenance, personnel handovers, and exception handling. Review the actual effectiveness of one scenario every quarter, continuously phase out useless functions, and add capabilities that truly support decision-making. Prevent “abandonment upon acceptance.”

Point 5: Organizational and Talent Gaps—The “Last Mile” Chasm Between Technology and Management

Neglected Manifestation: Platform construction is led by the IT department, but operation and use fall to the energy management or environmental protection departments. This creates a disconnect where users do not know how to use it or do not want to use it, preventing the platform’s value from being realized.

Core Issue: An energy-carbon management platform is essentially a management tool, not a pure technical system. It requires the coordination of energy engineers, carbon managers, data analysts, and frontline operations personnel. However, composite talents who understand energy, carbon, and data simultaneously are extremely scarce in the current market. Enterprises often underestimate the difficulty of talent cultivation and organizational change.

Solution: Launch a talent echelon training plan alongside platform construction, drawing backbone members from energy management, production process, and IT departments to form a “Special Energy-Carbon Management Task Force.” Simultaneously establish a usage assessment mechanism, incorporating indicators such as platform usage frequency, data quality, and exception handling efficiency into the performance evaluations of relevant departments and personnel.

Point 6: From “Dual Control of Energy Consumption” to “Dual Control of Carbon Emissions”—The Policy Logic Has Changed, and Platform Thinking Must Keep Up

Neglected Manifestation: The design logic of many energy-carbon management platforms remains stuck in the era of “Dual Control of Energy Consumption” prior to the 15th Five-Year Plan, focusing on energy consumption monitoring and energy-saving analysis, with carbon emission management as a mere auxiliary module.

Core Issue: During the 15th Five-Year Plan period, carbon emission intensity has replaced energy consumption intensity as a binding indicator, and total carbon emissions are included in assessments. This means the core function of the platform must shift from “managing energy consumption” to “managing carbon emissions.” Specifically, the platform needs to support new functions such as carbon emission budget management, carbon emission early warning, carbon quota compliance tracking, carbon asset trading assistance, and product carbon footprint accounting. It needs to interface with multiple external systems such as the national carbon emission rights trading market and the green certificate trading market, and meet the data reporting requirements for dual control carbon emission assessments.

Solution: During the platform planning stage, benchmark against the policy requirements of the 15th Five-Year Plan’s dual control of carbon emissions. Reconstruct the platform’s functional architecture with carbon emission management as the main thread to ensure the platform’s “policy adaptability” and “assessment responsiveness.”

Conclusion

Building an energy-carbon management platform is a “war of attrition,” not a “blitzkrieg.” During the critical period of the 15th Five-Year Plan’s carbon peak offensive, the value of a platform lies not in how flashy the displays are or how rich the features are, but in whether the data is authentic and credible, whether the accounting can withstand audits, and whether decisions are truly implemented. Those easily neglected underlying issues—measurement systems, accounting precision, system integration, continuous operation, talent assurance, and policy adaptation—are precisely what determine the success or failure of platform construction. Only by returning to the basics and solidly performing this “invisible work” can the energy-carbon management platform truly become a digital engine for the green and low-carbon transformation of enterprises.

Energy-Carbon Platforms Should Prioritize Substantive Functionality Over Visual Displays最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。

Against the backdrop of China’s deepening “dual carbon” strategy, the power industry, as the largest single source of carbon emissions, has shifted its energy-saving and carbon reduction efforts from policy requirements to an internal driver for corporate survival and development. From coal-fired power plants to gas-fired units, and from captive power plants to biomass power generation, the decarbonization paths for various types of power plants are becoming increasingly clear. A batch of mature, engineering-verified technologies is moving from demonstration to large-scale application.

I. Improving Power Generation Efficiency: Reducing Carbon Footprint at the Source

The most direct means of energy saving and carbon reduction is to generate more electricity from every gram of fuel.

In July 2026, news of the Datang Yuncheng project entering full-capacity operation attracted industry attention. As the world’s first ultra-supercritical double-reheat coal-fired unit with a reheat steam temperature exceeding 630°C, its coal consumption for power generation is as low as 245.74 g/kWh, with generation efficiency exceeding 50%. It achieved four world records: “highest pressure, highest temperature, highest efficiency, and lowest coal consumption.” Once the two 1,000 MW units are fully operational, they can save 208,000 tons of standard coal and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by approximately 540,000 tons annually. More notably, the project marked the first engineering application of the domestically produced G115 new martensitic heat-resistant steel, completely breaking the long-term foreign dominance in high-temperature materials and clearing the material bottleneck for the mass construction of similar high-parameter units.

Figure 1: Datang Yuncheng Project

In Zhijin, Guizhou, another technical route has also delivered impressive results. The world’s first 660 MW ultra-supercritical “W-flame” boiler, built by SPIC, was specifically designed to address the chronic issues of high-sulfur anthracite in Southwest China, which is “difficult to ignite, difficult to stabilize, and difficult to burn out.” According to staff, the furnace uses a “W” shaped combustion design, significantly extending the residence time of anthracite in the furnace. “In the past, it took 350 grams of coal to generate 1 kWh of electricity; now it only takes 285 grams.” Power plant staff summarized the transformation effect with a simple set of data—saving 65 grams of standard coal per kWh, resulting in an annual saving of 120,000 tons of standard coal, and reducing cumulative carbon dioxide emissions by over 240,000 tons in less than a year of operation.

Figure 2: Guizhou Zhijin Project

For existing units, steam turbine flow path modernization is one of the technical routes with the highest return on investment. Unit 2 of the Sichuan Baima Circulating Fluidized Bed Demonstration Power Station signed a contract with Dongfang Electric for a flow path modernization with a total investment of 8.3 million yuan. After the upgrade, it can save 26,200 tons of standard coal annually, with the investment recoverable in two to three years. The core of this type of modification is to revitalize old units by optimizing blade profiles, improving steam seal structures, and reducing flow losses. According to industry statistics, after a 300 MW class unit completes flow path modernization, the coal consumption for power supply typically drops by 10 to 15 g/kWh.

Figure 3: Unit 2 of Huadian Sichuan Company’s Neijiang Baima Gas Turbine Innovative Development Demonstration Project

II. Fuel Substitution and Co-firing: Feeding Power Plants “Low-Carbon Fuel”

If efficiency improvement is about “reducing expenditure,” then fuel substitution is about “increasing revenue”—directly reducing carbon emissions from the fuel end.

Green ammonia co-firing is one of the directions with the fastest progress in recent years. Ammonia molecules contain no carbon, and the combustion products are only nitrogen and water. The “ammonia-coal co-firing” technology developed by Longyuan Environmental Protection (a subsidiary of CHN Energy) has achieved green ammonia co-firing ratios of 10% to 30%, with an annual carbon reduction capacity of 183,700 tons. Even more cutting-edge green hydrogen co-firing technology has achieved breakthroughs—the company achieved a 50% green hydrogen co-firing ratio on a 40 MW industrial coal-fired boiler, and even possesses 100% pure hydrogen combustion capability. Although hydrogen combustion involves high temperatures, risk of deflagration, and high control difficulty, once mature, it will truly enable zero-carbon operation of thermal power.

Figure 4: Effect Diagram of Ammonia Co-firing Ratios

Biomass coupled co-firing is a more practical route. In 2026, Longyuan Technology achieved engineering verification of 10% biomass co-firing in a 1,000 MW boiler at the CHN Energy Qingyuan Power Plant, filling the technical gap in biomass co-firing for large-capacity units in China. During the same period, Shaanxi Energy Linbei Power Generation Co., Ltd. also launched a biomass coupled co-firing project for circulating fluidized bed boilers, with a planned investment of 47.11 million yuan, an annual biomass co-firing volume of about 220,000 tons, and a reduction of over 230,000 tons of carbon dioxide. The carbon dioxide absorbed by biomass during growth is basically balanced with the carbon released during combustion; from a life-cycle perspective, the emission reduction effect is significant.

Figure 5: CHN Energy Qingyuan Power Plant

III. Deep Utilization of Waste Heat: “Picking Up” Wasted Heat

In the energy flow of a traditional power plant, about 40% to 50% of the heat is lost to the atmosphere through cooling towers. Waste heat recovery and utilization is about turning this “waste heat” into valuable commodities.

The practice in Jinan is quite representative. The Gaoxin Energy Station of Jinan Heating Group uses a 110-kilometer long-distance pipeline network to transport industrial waste heat from a power plant in Liaocheng to the urban area of Jinan, replacing 54 original coal-fired boilers in the city. According to “China Newsweek,” Jinan has thus become one of the first cities in the country to achieve “coal-free” centralized heating.

Figure 6: Jinan Waste Heat Pipeline

For power plants without long-distance transport conditions, heat pump storage technology provides another way out. CHN Energy Ningxia Lingwu Power Generation Co., Ltd. adopted a solution using large-capacity electric boilers plus heat storage tanks, converting electrical energy into thermal energy for storage during low-peak electricity price periods and releasing heat directly for heating when needed, successfully achieving decoupling of heat and power. This project was selected as a typical case of the 2025 “Three-Reform Linkage” by the China Electricity Council. However, the promotion of heat storage technology still faces constraints from electricity price mechanisms—heat storage has not yet been included in the category of “new energy storage,” making it difficult to enjoy corresponding electricity price policy support, which requires further streamlining at the policy level.

Figure 7: China’s First Full-Capacity “Flywheel Energy Storage + Thermal Power Combined Frequency Regulation” Project in the Coal Power Field

IV. End-of-Pipe Treatment: Industrial Breakthrough of CCUS

For coal-fired power plants where emission reduction is most difficult, Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) is the ultimate bottom-line technical means.

In September 2025, the world’s largest coal power carbon capture demonstration project was officially put into operation at the Huaneng Gansu Zhengning Power Plant. The project captures carbon from the net flue gas after desulfurization of Unit 1, capturing 1.5 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, with a capture rate exceeding 90% and a purity exceeding 99%. The captured carbon dioxide is compressed into a supercritical state and can be used for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in oil fields, green fuel synthesis, and even the production of mineralized building materials, completing the entire “capture-utilization-storage” industrial chain. Lanshi Heavy Equipment provided core equipment for the project, including an 86-meter-high composite absorption tower. This domestic-first integrated square structure with three functional zones (pre-washing, absorption, and water washing) solved industry bottlenecks such as structural mechanical instability of ultra-large cross-section separation equipment and high energy consumption for capturing low-concentration flue gas.

Figure 8: Huaneng Gansu Zhengning Power Plant

V. Intelligent Operation: Invisible Energy-Saving Space

Beyond hardware modifications, operational optimization also holds considerable energy-saving potential.

Power plants under CHN Energy Guoshen Company introduced the “DeepSeek” large model as an intelligent hub, connecting hundreds of sensors and imaging devices. The accuracy of equipment anomaly identification exceeds 95%, and unplanned downtime has been reduced by 40%. At the Zhundong Power Plant, the system uses knowledge graph reasoning to generate intelligent work orders containing cause analysis, disposal suggestions, and risk warnings within milliseconds. According to the production director, with the assistance of the large model, the average troubleshooting time has been shortened by nearly 70%, the adoption rate of optimized operation suggestions has reached over 90%, and more than 10,000 tons of standard coal are saved annually.

Figure 9: Inspection Robot

These seemingly insignificant “soft” modifications, when combined, often yield greater benefits than individual hardware upgrades. When the operating parameters of all auxiliary machines in a power plant can be optimized in real-time according to load changes, the saved plant power and coal over the course of a year amount to significant figures.

Conclusion

Reviewing the energy-saving and carbon reduction practices of various power plants, a clear logical chain can be summarized: first improve efficiency, then substitute fuel, then recover waste heat, and finally use CCUS as a bottom-line, while using intelligent means throughout the entire process. Every technology on this path is no longer just a laboratory concept but a mature solution that has withstood engineering verification.

For enterprises with energy-saving and carbon reduction technical services as their core business, the current period is a rare window of opportunity. At the national level, the “Implementation Plan for Special Actions for the Upgrade of New Generation Coal Power (2025–2027)” clearly states that the carbon emissions per kWh of pilot demonstration units should be reduced by 10% to 20% compared to similar types in 2024. With policy goals, technical reserves, and market demand, the next competition will be about who can combine these technologies more reasonably and implement them more efficiently.

Feasibility Directions and Technical Practices for Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction in Power Plants最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。

In the past, many enterprises understood ESG as something mainly focused on listed companies, multinational corporations, or large groups. It seemed that only enterprises facing capital markets, rating agencies, and investors needed to prepare ESG reports or sustainability reports.

However, as requirements for green supply chains, environmental information disclosure, product carbon footprints, CBAM, green factories, and zero-carbon parks continue to advance, ESG is gradually moving from a capital market topic into the operational management of ordinary manufacturing enterprises.

For manufacturing enterprises, ESG is not just about ‘writing a report,’ but a systematic expression of the enterprise’s environment, energy, carbon emissions, employees, safety, supply chain, and governance capabilities. In the future, whether an enterprise possesses a sustainable data foundation will increasingly influence customer evaluations, supply chain access, green certifications, financing communications, and international trade compliance.

I. ESG Demand is Extending from Listed Companies to Supply Chain Enterprises

In the past, ESG disclosure was mainly driven proactively by listed companies. Listed companies need to face exchanges, investors, and rating agencies, and thus established sustainability reports and ESG management systems earlier.

But now, pressure is being transmitted down the supply chain. An increasing number of large customers, foreign-funded enterprises, export buyers, and industry leaders have begun to require suppliers to provide information on the environment, carbon emissions, energy use, labor compliance, production safety, and business ethics.

Even if an enterprise is not a listed company itself, it may passively enter the ESG management system due to customer requirements, export requirements, or supply chain audits. The earlier the basic data is established, the less likely the enterprise will be at a disadvantage when facing customer questionnaires, supplier audits, green procurement, and export compliance in the future.

II. What Manufacturing Enterprises Lack Most is Not Reports, But Data Master Files

Many enterprises believe that ESG is simply about writing a report. In reality, the report is only the final form of presentation; what truly supports the report is the underlying data.

For example, an enterprise’s annual electricity consumption, water consumption, natural gas usage, wastewater and exhaust emissions, hazardous waste disposal, greenhouse gas emissions, number of employees, safety training, occupational health, supplier management, and compliance systems all need to have clear sources and supporting materials.

If this data is not collected regularly, problems such as scattered data, inconsistent metrics, lack of original vouchers, and the inability to explain annual changes are likely to occur when it comes time to prepare reports, fill out customer questionnaires, or undergo audits.

Therefore, what manufacturing enterprises should prioritize establishing is not a beautiful ESG report, but a set of ESG data master files that can be continuously updated. This master file should specify: where the data comes from, which department is responsible, what the statistical cycle is, whether there is supporting evidence, whether annual comparisons can be made, and whether it can be used for external disclosure.

III. Environment and Carbon Data are Becoming the Core of ESG

In manufacturing scenarios, the ESG content most likely to be scrutinized by customers is usually related to the environment and carbon.

This includes energy consumption, energy consumption per unit of product, greenhouse gas emissions, use of green electricity, wastewater and exhaust gas treatment, solid and hazardous waste management, environmental compliance records, energy-saving renovation projects, and product carbon footprints.

Especially after the expansion of the national carbon market, the improvement of product carbon footprint standards, and the entry of CBAM into the formal implementation stage, carbon data requirements are becoming more specific. Enterprises must not only state that they value low-carbon development but also provide verifiable data to prove their energy and emission management capabilities.

This is also why the boundaries between ESG and carbon management, energy management, and product carbon footprints are gradually merging. In the future, a mature set of ESG master files should often simultaneously support carbon accounting, green factories, customer audits, product carbon footprints, and supply chain disclosures.

IV. Manufacturing Enterprises Can Start with Three Steps

For most manufacturing enterprises, ESG management does not need to be very complex from the start. A more realistic path is to build basic capabilities first, and then gradually improve the reporting and management system.

First, conduct a data inventory.

Enterprises can review existing data from the dimensions of environment, energy, carbon emissions, employees, safety, supply chain, and governance systems to identify what is available, what is missing, who is responsible, and whether there are vouchers.

Second, establish an annual ESG data master file.

Consolidate data scattered across environmental protection, production, energy, personnel, procurement, finance, and other departments to form a data foundation that can be updated annually, is traceable, and can be used for report preparation.

Third, form external disclosure documents.

After the data master file is relatively complete, enterprises can prepare ESG reports, sustainability reports, or social responsibility reports based on their own needs, or use the data for customer questionnaires, green supply chain audits, and export compliance documents.

This sequence is more secure than starting directly with ‘writing a report’ and better meets the long-term management needs of the enterprise.

Conclusion

ESG is no longer exclusive to listed companies.

With the continuous increase in requirements for green supply chains, carbon markets, product carbon footprints, export compliance, and customer audits, more and more manufacturing enterprises need to establish their own ESG data foundation. For enterprises, the ESG report is only the result; what truly matters is the set of continuous, accurate, and traceable data master files behind it.

Whoever can organize their environment, energy, carbon emissions, employees, safety, supply chain, and governance data more early will be more proactive in future customer audits, green procurement, low-carbon competition, and international trade rules.

For manufacturing enterprises to do ESG, they do not necessarily have to start with a full report, but they must start with a set of credible data master files.

ESG is Not Exclusive to Listed Companies: Why Manufacturing Enterprises Also Need to Establish ESG Data Master Files最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。

On August 24, the Ministry of Ecology and Environment held an executive meeting to review and approve in principle the “Total Quota and Allocation Plan for the Power Generation Industry for 2025 and 2026, and for the Steel, Cement, and Aluminum Smelting Industries for 2026” (hereinafter referred to as the “Plan”). This document is a significant institutional arrangement for quota management in the power, steel, cement, and aluminum smelting sectors following the expansion of the national carbon market. It also marks the national carbon market’s progression from industry inclusion and rule adaptation toward further quota constraints and refined management.

According to the explanation previously released by the Ministry of Ecology and Environment for public comment, the primary purpose of the “Plan” is to effectively carry out quota allocation for the power, steel, cement, and aluminum smelting industries, further leveraging market mechanisms to control greenhouse gas emissions and reduce the overall cost of emission reductions for society. The draft for comments was released in July, with the feedback deadline set for August 5.

Regarding coverage, the “Plan” simultaneously involves the power generation industry for 2025 and 2026, as well as the steel, cement, and aluminum smelting industries for 2026. This means that the power generation industry remains the foundational sector of the national carbon market, while the steel, cement, and aluminum smelting industries enter a more substantial stage of quota allocation following the expansion. Previous work plans have clarified that key emission units in the steel, cement, and aluminum smelting industries must surrender carbon emission quotas in full to provincial ecological and environmental authorities annually and conduct centralized unified trading through the national carbon emission rights trading system.

Regarding allocation methodology, the steel, cement, and aluminum smelting industries will implement quota allocation primarily based on carbon emission intensity control during the initial implementation phase. Public documents show that the 2024 quota allocation will equal the verified actual carbon emissions, while the 2025 and 2026 allocations will be based on carbon emission intensity control. In the deepening and refinement phase, quota allocation methods will be optimized against advanced industry benchmarks to drive a continuous decline in carbon emission intensity per unit of product or output.

The focus of this arrangement is that enterprises cannot only focus on total emissions; they must also pay attention to emission levels per unit of product. For steel enterprises, the energy structure and emission intensity of processes such as sintering, ironmaking, steelmaking, and rolling will affect the overall carbon efficiency performance. For cement enterprises, clinker production, fuel structure, waste heat utilization, and emission intensity per unit of clinker will become key indicators in subsequent carbon management.

From a policy orientation perspective, quota allocation will gradually reflect the principle of “the advanced benefit, while the laggards face pressure.” Interpretations from the Ministry of Ecology and Environment have pointed out that a free quota allocation framework based on carbon emission intensity control can create a clear incentive mechanism for emission reduction by scientifically setting industry benchmarks, ensuring that the lower an enterprise’s carbon emissions per unit of product, the higher its quota surplus rate.

This means that the role of the national carbon market is not just to require enterprises to complete annual compliance, but also to guide them to continuously reduce carbon emissions per unit of product through the quota allocation mechanism. For steel and cement enterprises, carbon management will no longer be limited to annual accounting, report filing, and verification/surrender, but will need to extend further into monthly data management, quota surplus/deficit forecasting, process carbon efficiency analysis, and energy-saving/carbon-reduction retrofitting.

The approval of the “Plan” also reminds enterprises to place greater importance on their data foundation. Quota allocation relies on real, accurate, and verifiable emission data. If enterprises continue to rely primarily on concentrated data organization at the end of the year, it may be difficult to promptly judge quota surpluses or deficits, and it will not be conducive to identifying high-emission processes and priorities for energy-saving retrofits. In the future, a more robust approach is to establish a continuous energy and carbon emission data ledger, unifying production, energy, equipment, and carbon management data.

Overall, the significance of the “Plan” does not lie in increasing the burden on enterprises in the short term, but in driving the national carbon market into a more standardized and refined operational stage. For key industries such as steel, cement, and aluminum smelting, future competitiveness will be reflected not only in production capacity and cost control but also in energy efficiency, carbon efficiency, and data management capabilities.

As quota allocation begins to truly widen the gap, corporate carbon management should also move from “completing annual accounting” to “supporting business decision-making.” Enterprises that establish reliable data systems, carbon efficiency benchmarking mechanisms, and energy-saving/carbon-reduction pathways earlier are more likely to gain the initiative in future quota constraints, carbon price fluctuations, and green, low-carbon competition.

Quota Allocation Begins to Truly ‘Widen the Gap’: Carbon Management for Steel and Cement Enterprises Must Shift from Accounting to Operations最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。

However, as the national carbon market gradually matures, this approach is beginning to prove insufficient.

Recently, the price of carbon emission allowances in the national carbon market has approached the level of 100 RMB/ton. For high-emission industries such as steel and cement, carbon allowances are no longer just compliance tools; they are becoming critical operational variables affecting corporate costs, profits, cash flow, and low-carbon investment decisions.

When carbon prices enter a higher range, if an enterprise faces a quota deficit of 50,000 tons, 100,000 tons, or even more, the corresponding compliance costs could reach millions or even tens of millions of RMB. This is no longer a minor matter that the environmental department can handle in isolation; it is a management issue that requires the collective attention of the executive level, finance department, production department, and energy management department.

In other words, carbon management is evolving from “completing a report at the end of the year” to “managing an asset throughout the year.”

I. Annual Accounting Is No Longer Enough; Monthly Data Management Is Becoming a Foundational Capability

In the past, some enterprises were accustomed to centrally organizing energy consumption, product output, emission factors, purchased electricity, and related supporting materials at the end of the year to complete annual carbon accounting and third-party verification. This method was barely manageable when carbon costs were low and data management requirements were relatively loose.

Currently, however, the national carbon market’s requirements for data quality and process management are increasing. Key industries such as power generation, steel, cement, and aluminum smelting have gradually entered the stage of monthly data archiving and refined management. If enterprises still rely on year-end data patching and manual Excel summaries, three problems are likely to arise.

First, inconsistent data standards.

Production, energy, environmental, and finance departments each hold different data, only to discover inconsistencies during the verification stage.

Second, incomplete process records.

When anomalies in energy consumption or product output occur in a specific month, it is impossible to quickly trace the cause or provide complete supporting documentation.

Third, lack of predictive capability.

Enterprises that only discover a quota deficit at the end of the year often miss better trading windows and opportunities for emission reduction adjustments.

Therefore, for steel and cement enterprises, what truly needs to be established is not a “year-end accounting mechanism,” but a continuously operating monthly carbon data management mechanism.

II. The Focus of Carbon Management Should Shift from “Accounting Results” to “Operational Forecasting”

Traditional carbon accounting focuses on: How much did we emit this year?
However, with carbon prices near 100 RMB/ton and quota management becoming increasingly refined, enterprises need to answer the following:

How much are we expected to emit this year?

Are the allowances sufficient?

When is a deficit likely to occur?

Is there a need for advance procurement or batch trading?

Which production stages deserve priority for energy-saving retrofits?

How much can carbon costs be reduced after implementing emission reduction projects?

This is the shift from “carbon accounting” to “carbon asset management.”

For steel enterprises, energy structures and emission intensities vary across stages like sintering, ironmaking, steelmaking, and steel rolling. If an enterprise only performs total annual accounting, it is difficult to identify where the true high-energy-consuming and high-emission nodes are. Conversely, by tracking by month, process, and energy type, anomalies can be detected earlier, and retrofit priorities can be determined more accurately.

For cement enterprises, clinker production is the core of emissions. Fuel substitution, waste heat power generation, grinding system optimization, and energy efficiency improvements all affect final emission intensity and allowance surplus or deficit. Without continuous and reliable data, it is difficult for enterprises to judge which retrofit offers the most economic value or to truly integrate energy-saving projects with carbon asset management.

III. As Carbon Prices Rise, the ROI of Energy-Saving Retrofits Needs to Be Recalculated

In the past, when enterprises evaluated energy-saving retrofit projects, they mainly looked at coal consumption, electricity consumption, steam costs, equipment efficiency, and maintenance costs. Now, carbon costs must also be included in the return on investment calculation.

For example, if an energy-saving project reduces CO2 emissions by 10,000 tons annually, with carbon prices near 100 RMB/ton, the improvement in carbon costs alone could generate an annual value of approximately one million RMB. When combined with reduced energy expenses, improved equipment efficiency, extended equipment life, and optimized O costs, the project’s comprehensive ROI becomes much more attractive than in the past.

This is crucial for corporate decision-making.

Because some energy-saving projects previously seemed to have long payback periods, enterprises were not necessarily willing to invest immediately. However, once carbon costs are factored in, the true economic value of the project may be re-evaluated. Therefore, when evaluating energy-saving equipment, waste heat recovery, energy management systems, and energy-carbon data platforms, steel and cement enterprises should not just look at a single energy-saving rate, but should establish a comprehensive ROI model of “energy cost + carbon cost + O cost + compliance risk.”

This is also key to whether future energy-saving and carbon-reduction projects can gain management support.

IV. Three Capabilities Enterprises Should Prioritize Establishing Now

Faced with an increasingly mature carbon market, key emission-controlled enterprises can start with three aspects.

First, establish a monthly carbon data ledger.
Enterprises should collect energy consumption, product output, emission factors, purchased electricity, key process operation data, and supporting materials on a monthly basis to reduce the pressure of year-end centralized organization. The more standardized the monthly data, the more proactive the annual verification will be.

Second, establish a quota surplus/deficit forecasting mechanism.

Enterprises should forecast annual emissions and quota deficits at least quarterly and, combined with carbon price trends, formulate trading, compliance, and emission reduction arrangements. The value of carbon asset management lies in transforming uncertain compliance risks into manageable operational plans in advance.

Third, integrate energy-saving retrofits into carbon asset management.

Energy-saving equipment, waste heat recovery, energy management systems, and energy-carbon data platforms should not be viewed as independent procurement projects, but should be integrated into the enterprise’s overall carbon asset management plan. Only by forming a closed loop of “data collection—emission forecasting—energy-saving diagnosis—project retrofit—compliance management” can enterprises truly transform policy pressure into operational gains.

Conclusion

Carbon prices approaching 100 RMB/ton signify that carbon management is moving from compliance work toward operational management.

For key emission-controlled enterprises such as steel and cement, future competitiveness depends not only on the ability to complete annual accounting but also on the ability to establish a continuous, accurate, and traceable data system and integrate carbon costs into production operations and investment decisions.

Truly mature carbon management should achieve: monthly data, quarterly forecasts, annual strategies, project returns, and proactive compliance. The carbon market is entering a more refined stage of development. Enterprises that establish systematic carbon asset management capabilities earlier will have a better chance of taking the initiative amidst future carbon price fluctuations, quota constraints, and green trade rules.

As Carbon Prices Approach 100 RMB/Ton, Carbon Management for Steel and Cement Enterprises Can No Longer Be Limited to Annual Accounting最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。

Introduction

On July 31, 2026, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) officially released the “15th Five-Year Plan for Industrial Green and Low-Carbon Development.” The document was formally publicized on the MIIT official website and accompanied by an authoritative interpretation via MIIT’s official WeChat channel, marking the official entry of China’s industrial green and low-carbon development into a new five-year policy cycle.

Compared to the “14th Five-Year Plan” period, the logic of industrial low-carbon policy has undergone a fundamental upgrade: shifting from extensive energy consumption control to comprehensive, refined, digital, and asset-based carbon emission governance. In the next five years, the industrial sector will no longer see “selective green transformation,” but rather a dual transformation of compliance and dividends across all industries, processes, and coverage.

Based on official MIIT planning documents and in-depth industry policy analysis, this article summarizes core policy sections, 13 industry signals, and implementation action plans for enterprises to help them quickly understand policies, avoid risks, and seize transformation opportunities.

I. Core Policy Section: MIIT “15th Five-Year Plan for Industrial Green and Low-Carbon Development”

This “15th Five-Year Plan” for industrial green and low-carbon development is the supreme guiding document for industrial energy conservation, carbon reduction, and green transformation over the next five years. The overall core theme is clear: cultivate and strengthen green productivity, and coordinate the two-way development of industrial greening and green industrialization.

The overall framework can be summarized as: 1 core action, 4 major capability enhancements, and 2 major support systems, covering all industrial sub-sectors.

1. One Core Action: Deeply Implement Carbon Peaking Actions in the Industrial Sector

Based on the industrial sector’s position as the main battlefield for carbon reduction, we will continue to optimize industrial and energy structures. Focusing on the four high-energy-consuming pillar industries—steel, petrochemicals, chemicals, and non-ferrous metals—we will advance specialized energy-saving and carbon-reduction upgrades. We will promote the large-scale replacement of clean energy such as green electricity and green hydrogen, and advance the overall industrial carbon peaking process in a steady and orderly manner, avoiding one-size-fits-all or campaign-style carbon reduction, and adhering to the principle of establishing the new before breaking the old for a smooth transition.

2. Four Major Capability Building Areas (Core Focus for the Next Five Years)

• Industrial Green Value Creation Capability

Promote comprehensive green upgrades for traditional industrial enterprises, phase out inefficient and backward processes and capacity, and simultaneously cultivate emerging green industries such as energy conservation, environmental protection, low-carbon equipment, circular economy, and carbon services, turning green transformation from a “cost item” into a “revenue item.”

• Green Equipment and Product Supply Capability

Fully popularize advanced equipment for high-efficiency energy saving, water saving, comprehensive solid waste utilization, and ultra-low emissions. Promote the standardization and large-scale production of green products, forcing enterprises to update old equipment and complete energy efficiency upgrades.

• Green and Low-Carbon Technological Innovation Capability

Focus on core technologies such as short-process smelting, low-carbon building materials, CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage), new energy storage, and zero-carbon processes. Encourage enterprises to conduct R and pilot applications to support deep carbon reduction through technological innovation.

• Integration of Intelligence and Greening

Promote the deep integration of digital technology with energy saving and carbon reduction. Vigorously promote smart energy-carbon management platforms, online energy consumption monitoring systems, and digital carbon management systems to achieve a shift from manual, extensive management to data-driven refined control.

3. Two Major Support Systems (Foundation for Industry Implementation)

• Industrial Resource Recycling System

Comprehensively promote the comprehensive recycling of bulk industrial solid waste, renewable resources, industrial wastewater, and waste heat and pressure. Build circular economy industrial chains with park coupling and industrial linkage to maximize the potential for resource-based cost reduction.

• Green Manufacturing and Service System

Continue to expand the cultivation systems for green factories, green parks, green supply chains, and zero-carbon factories. Simultaneously, vigorously support third-party professional service industries such as energy auditing, energy-saving diagnosis, carbon asset management, and carbon verification to improve the industrial green and low-carbon service ecosystem.

II. 13 Core Policy Signals for the Next Five Years

Combining the full text of the “15th Five-Year Plan” and authoritative policy analysis, the energy-saving and carbon-reduction track will release 13 key signals over the next five years, which will directly determine the direction of corporate compliance, survival, and profitability:

1. Complete Shift in Management Logic: Transitioning from traditional dual control of energy consumption to a dual control system of total carbon emissions and intensity; carbon indicators will become core performance metrics for enterprises.

2. Industry as the Absolute Main Battlefield: Continued strict regulation of the four high-energy-consuming industries, with small and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises gradually included in the scope of normalized management.

3. Shift of Carbon Reduction Focus Upstream: Moving away from end-of-pipe treatment to focus on source process optimization, energy structure substitution, and equipment energy efficiency upgrades.

4. Explosion of Low-Carbon, Near-Zero, and Zero-Carbon Demonstration Factories: The “15th Five-Year Plan” will cultivate these factories on a large scale through tiered classification, with continuous increases in support for demonstration project applications and fiscal policy subsidies.

5. Digital Carbon Management as Standard: Online monitoring systems for energy consumption and carbon emissions will gradually become a mandatory standard for industrial enterprises above a designated size.

6. Enhanced Monetization of Circular Economy: Solid waste utilization, waste heat recovery, and recycled materials will be included in green output calculations, directly reducing costs and increasing revenue.

7. Accelerated Clean Energy Substitution: Strong policy support for onsite photovoltaics, green power procurement, energy storage, and green hydrogen applications, with substitution costs continuing to fall.

8. Full Expansion of the Energy-Saving Service Market: Energy auditing, energy-saving hosting, and energy performance contracting (EPC) will become mainstream modes for cost reduction.

9. Carbon Asset Management Becomes a Necessity: Carbon footprinting, verification, compliance, and CCER development will become routine tasks for enterprises.

10. Certified Professionals Required: Key energy-using units will be mandatory to employ certified professionals in energy and carbon management.

11. Accelerated Phasing Out of Backward Capacity: Increased efforts to eliminate high-energy-consuming, low-efficiency old production lines, with significantly higher approval thresholds for new projects.

12. Full Implementation of Green Supply Chains: Carbon footprint, ESG disclosure, and low-carbon qualifications will directly affect corporate bidding, customer access, and order acquisition.

13. Continued Dividends from Technical Transformation Subsidies: Special subsidies and tax incentives can be applied for energy-saving and carbon-reduction technical upgrades, low-carbon equipment updates, and green projects.

III. Industry-Specific Implementation Guide: What Should Enterprises Do Facing the “15th Five-Year Plan” New Policy?

1. High-Energy-Consuming Industries (Steel, Non-ferrous Metals, Petrochemicals, Building Materials, Basic Chemicals)

[Short-term Implementation Actions]

Comprehensively conduct professional energy audits to identify energy consumption baselines, locate high-energy-consuming bottlenecks, and form an actionable list of energy-saving upgrades; standardize the establishment of carbon ledgers, conduct regular carbon footprinting, and prepare in advance for carbon verification and policy regulation; review existing production processes, eliminate inefficient steps, and plan low-carbon process upgrade paths.

[Medium-to-Long-term Planning]

Deploy distributed photovoltaics and energy storage systems, and procure green electricity long-term to reduce carbon emissions; advance solid waste resource utilization and waste heat recovery projects; actively apply for green factory and zero-carbon factory demonstration projects; and proactively plan for CCUS pilot demonstrations and other cutting-edge low-carbon technologies like short-process manufacturing.

2. Light Industrial Manufacturing (Textiles, Paper, Machinery, Food Processing, etc.)

[Short-term Implementation Actions]

Comprehensively screen old high-energy-consuming equipment, and phase out inefficient motors, boilers, and refrigeration equipment in batches; establish a standardized energy consumption statistics system and regulate energy management ledgers.

[Medium-to-Long-term Planning]

Promote energy-saving production processes and build digital energy consumption management platforms; improve green supply chain systems to meet the low-carbon procurement requirements of downstream brand customers and enhance market competitiveness.

3. Industrial Park/Cluster Operators

Coordinate the joint construction and sharing of energy infrastructure in the park, and build systems for unified heating, waste heat recovery, and cascade utilization; build a smart energy-carbon management platform for the park to achieve unified monitoring of energy consumption and carbon emissions for park enterprises; promote resource exchange and industrial coupling among enterprises in the park to create circular economy demonstration parks.

4. Universal Action Checklist for All Industries

• Assess current status: Complete energy audits and carbon footprinting, and establish standardized energy consumption and carbon emission data ledgers;

• Assess current status: Complete energy audits and carbon footprinting, and establish standardized energy consumption and carbon emission data ledgers;

• Build capabilities: Form a professional energy-carbon management team and equip it with certified energy and carbon management professionals;

• Digital upgrade: Implement energy consumption and carbon emission monitoring systems to achieve refined and digital management;

• Phased upgrades: Prioritize short-cycle energy-saving and carbon-reduction projects, and plan for long-term clean energy substitution;

• Seize dividends: Proactively apply for green manufacturing, energy-saving technical transformation subsidies, and low-carbon demonstration projects;

• Manage carbon assets: Establish a normalized carbon management system to capitalize on carbon market expansion and CCER dividends.

IV. Conclusion

The implementation of the “15th Five-Year Plan” industrial green and low-carbon new policy marks the industry’s official departure from the era of “passive compliance” and its entry into a new cycle of green quality improvement, low-carbon efficiency enhancement, and green-promoted production.

In the next five years, whoever can take the lead in completing energy efficiency upgrades, carbon system construction, digital management, and green qualification layout will occupy an absolute advantage in industry competition and enjoy policy dividends and market premiums.

ORISEEN Energy is deeply rooted in the field of industrial energy conservation and carbon reduction. We provide enterprises across all industries with professional full-chain services: policy interpretation, energy auditing, carbon footprinting, carbon asset management, green factory applications, and customized energy-saving transformation solutions, helping enterprises smoothly and efficiently complete the “15th Five-Year Plan” green and low-carbon transition, ensuring compliance, risk avoidance, and dividend capture.

If you need a customized energy-saving and carbon-reduction transformation plan for your enterprise, please feel free to leave a message for consultation and exchange.

Reference Article: “15th Five-Year Plan for Industrial Green and Low-Carbon Development”

#15thFiveYearPlan #GreenLowCarbon #EnergySavingCarbonReduction

[Industry Forecast] Interpretation and Implementation Guide for the “15th Five-Year Plan” for Industrial Green and Low-Carbon Development最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。

Recently, in the June 2026 Guangdong Provincial Carbon Emission Manager Vocational Skill Level Certification Examination, three colleagues from ORISEEN successfully passed the assessment by virtue of their solid theoretical foundation and excellent practical abilities. Among them, two obtained the Level 3 Senior Technician Vocational Skill Level Certificate for “Carbon Accountant,” and one obtained the Level 3 Senior Technician Vocational Skill Level Certificate for “Carbon Consultant.”

Against the backdrop of the in-depth advancement of the “Dual Carbon” strategy, the specialization and standardization of low-carbon technical talent are key supports for promoting high-quality corporate development. While fulfilling their primary duties, these three colleagues actively enhanced their professional literacy and successfully passed the unified provincial certification. This is not only a high recognition of their individual professional levels but also marks a further enrichment and improvement of ORISEEN’s professional technical strength in the green and low-carbon field.

The acquisition of every qualification certification stems from a profound understanding of national policy standards and industry norms; every upgrade in technical capability is aimed at better serving our clients and society.

Rooted in professionalism, striving for excellence. Looking ahead, ORISEEN will always uphold the spirit of professionalism, continue to strengthen talent team building and technical accumulation, and provide the highest quality, stable, and reliable services to our clients with more rigorous service standards and cutting-edge technical capabilities, contributing to the realization of a green and low-carbon transformation.

We hereby share this great news and extend our warmest congratulations to the three colleagues!

Great News! Three ORISEEN Employees Successfully Pass the Guangdong Provincial Carbon Emission Manager Vocational Skill Level Certification最先出现在原见能源 ORISEEN｜能碳管理・碳核算・工业节能降碳。