Critical Analysis of Coal Life Cycle Using the Life Cycle Assessment

被引:0
|
作者
Dinca, Cristian [1 ]
Badea, Adrian [1 ]
Apostol, Tiberiu [1 ]
Marculescu, Cosmin [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Politehn Bucuresti, Dept Power Engn, RO-060042 Bucharest, Romania
来源
PROGRESS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, VOL II, PTS A AND B | 2009年
关键词
coal; monitoring emissions; power plant; energy; LCA;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Coal has the largest share of utility power generation in the Romania, accounting for approximately 40% of all utility-produced electricity. Therefore, understanding the environmental implications of producing electricity from coal is an important component of any plan to reduce total emissions and resource consumption. Three systems were examined: a) a plant that represents the average emissions and efficiency of currently operating coal-fired power plants in the Romania; b) a new coal-fired power plant that meets the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS); c) a highly advanced coal-fired power plant utilizing a low emission boiler system (LEBS). The results are then used to evaluate the environmental impacts of the process so that efforts can be focused on mitigating possible effects. Each system analyzed consists of coal mining, transportation, and electricity generation. In keeping with the cradle-to-grave concept of LCA, upstream processes required for the operation of these three subsystems were also included in this study. As expected, because coal combustion results in the production of CO(2) from carbon that was previously sequestered underground, CO(2) accounts for the vast majority (98%-99% by weight) of the total air emissions from each system examined. The rate of production is 1,022 g/kWh, 941 g/kWh, and 741 g/kWh for the Average, NSPS, and LEBS systems, respectively. Two other climate change gases, methane and nitrous oxide, are also emitted from the system. Although the global warming potential (GWP) of these gases is much higher than that of CO(2), they are emitted in much smaller quantities and therefore do not significantly change the GWP of the overall systems. Apart from the CO(2) produced during coal combustion, operations related to flue gas clean-up produce more CO(2) than any other upstream process. Limestone production, transportation, and use account for 59% and 62% of the non-coal CO(2) emissions in the Average and NSPS systems. These amounts are greater than twice the CO(2) emissions related to transportation of the coal. In the LEBS system, operations associated with the production and use of natural gas to regenerate the CuO sorbent is responsible for 35% of the total non-coal CO(2) emissions. Coal transportation, in this system, produces nearly 40% of the non-coal CO(2).
引用
收藏
页码:578 / 586
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODS
    Dong, Ya Hong
    Ng, S. Thomas
    Kumaraswamy, Mohan M.
    ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2016, 15 (04): : 879 - 890
  • [2] Integration of life cycle assessment and life cycle cost using building information modeling: A critical review
    Lu, Kun
    Jiang, Xiaoyan
    Yu, Jingyu
    Tam, Vivian W. Y.
    Skitmore, Martin
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 285
  • [3] Automation of Life Cycle Assessment-A Critical Review of Developments in the Field of Life Cycle Inventory Analysis
    Koeck, Bianca
    Friedl, Anton
    Loaiza, Sebastian Serna
    Wukovits, Walter
    Mihalyi-Schneider, Bettina
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (06)
  • [4] Life cycle assessment analysis of supercritical coal power units
    Ziebik, Andrzej
    Hoinka, Krzysztof
    Liszka, Marcin
    ARCHIVES OF THERMODYNAMICS, 2010, 31 (03) : 115 - 130
  • [5] The Life Cycle Assessment Of The Coal, Oil, And LNG
    Jiang, Hui
    Zhang, Yun
    Qi, Yu
    Zeng, Yufei
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2016 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ADVANCES IN ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT AND CHEMICAL SCIENCE, 2016, 76 : 35 - 38
  • [6] Life cycle assessment of biochar cofiring with coal
    Huang, Yu-Fong
    Syu, Fu-Siang
    Chiueh, Pei-Te
    Lo, Shang-Lien
    BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, 2013, 131 : 166 - 171
  • [7] Critical analysis of the Life Cycle Assessment of the Italian cement industry
    Moretti, L.
    Caro, S.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2017, 152 : 198 - 210
  • [8] A benchmark for life cycle air emissions and life cycle impact assessment of hydrokinetic energy extraction using life cycle assessment
    Miller, Veronica B.
    Landis, Amy E.
    Schaefer, Laura A.
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2011, 36 (03) : 1040 - 1046
  • [9] Life cycle assessment of aerogels: a critical review
    Kara, Ilkay Turhan
    Kiyak, Baris
    Gunes, Neslihan Colak
    Yucel, Sevil
    JOURNAL OF SOL-GEL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2024, 111 (02) : 618 - 649
  • [10] A review on Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Energy Assessment and Life Cycle Carbon Emissions Assessment on buildings
    Chau, C. K.
    Leung, T. M.
    Ng, W. Y.
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2015, 143 : 395 - 413