Emergy evaluation of power generation systems

被引:31
作者
Ren, Siyue [1 ]
Feng, Xiao [1 ]
Yang, Minbo [1 ]
机构
[1] Xi An Jiao Tong Univ, Sch Chem Engn & Technol, Xian 710049, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Emergy indices; Power generation systems; Sustainability; Efficiency; RENEWABLE ENERGY; SMALL HYDROPOWER; SOLAR POWER; ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY; EMBODIED ENERGY; WIND POWER; PLANT; PERSPECTIVES; EMISSIONS; SCHEMES;
D O I
10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112749
中图分类号
O414.1 [热力学];
学科分类号
摘要
With the increasing demand of power sources, it is of great significance to evaluate different power generation systems and optimize the energy structure. The emergy is proved to be a comprehensive and powerful way to evaluate the sustainability of a system. In this paper, emergy is used to compare ten power generation systems by two calculation methods of emergy indices. The emergy data of integrated gasification combined cycle and wind power generation systems are gathered from the studies of life cycle assessment, while those of the other eight systems are taken from existing emergy evaluations and converted to the same baseline. The study of hydropower generation systems shows the influence of technical progress and geographical location to the sustainability. The comparison of ten power generation systems shows that the hydropower generation system has the best sustainability while the wind and solar systems demonstrate relatively low sustainability. Besides, the sustainability is relative to the carbon dioxide tax. The sustainability of wind and concentrated solar power generation systems is tend to be better than that of integrated gasification combined cycle power generation system with an increase in the carbon dioxide tax. The results indicate that the technology, investment cost and carbon dioxide emission are essential factors to sustainability of power generation systems.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]  
Black J., 2010, COST PERF BAS FOSS E, V1
[2]   Assessing the global environmental sources driving the geobiosphere: A revised emergy baseline [J].
Brown, Mark T. ;
Ulgiati, Sergio .
ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2016, 339 :126-132
[3]   Updated evaluation of exergy and emergy driving the geobiosphere: A review and refinement of the emergy baseline [J].
Brown, Mark T. ;
Ulgiati, Sergio .
ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2010, 221 (20) :2501-2508
[4]   EMergy analysis perspectives of Thailand and Mekong river dam proposals [J].
Brown, MT ;
McClanahan, TR .
ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 1996, 91 (1-3) :105-130
[5]   Emergy evaluations and environmental loading of electricity production systems [J].
Brown, MT ;
Ulgiati, S .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2002, 10 (04) :321-334
[6]   Integrating life cycle assessment and emergy synthesis for the evaluation of a dry steam geothermal power plant in Italy [J].
Buonocore, Elvira ;
Vanoli, Laura ;
Carotenuto, Alberto ;
Ulgiati, Sergio .
ENERGY, 2015, 86 :476-487
[7]   Response to embodied energy and emergy analyses of a concentrating solar power (CSP) system (2012) [J].
Campbell, Elliott .
ENERGY POLICY, 2013, 60 :424-426
[8]   EMPLOYING THREE RATIO INDICES FOR ECOLOGICAL EFFECT ASSESSMENT OF MANWAN DAM CONSTRUCTION IN THE LANCANG RIVER, CHINA [J].
Cui, Baoshan ;
Hu, Bo ;
Zhai, Hongjuan .
RIVER RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS, 2011, 27 (08) :1000-1022
[9]  
E.a.V.E. the World Bank, 2017, STAT TRENDS CARB PRI
[10]  
Feng X, 2015, PRINCIPLES TECHNOLOG