Uncertainty in well-to-tank with combustion greenhouse gas emissions of transportation fuels derived from North American crudes

被引:13
作者
Di Lullo, Giovanni [1 ]
Zhang, Hao [1 ]
Kumar, Amit [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Alberta, Dept Mech Engn, Donadeo Innovat Ctr Engn, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
Life cycle assessment; Well-to-combustion; CO2; emissions; Crude; Uncertainty; Monte Carlo; OIL SANDS PRODUCTS; LIFE-CYCLE; CONVENTIONAL CRUDES; ENERGY-CONSUMPTION; INFORMATION GAPS; EFFICIENCY; RECOVERY;
D O I
10.1016/j.energy.2017.04.040
中图分类号
O414.1 [热力学];
学科分类号
摘要
Many studies have calculated deterministic point estimates of well-to-combustion (WTC) emissions of transportation fuels from crude oil in an attempt to determine which crude oils have lower or higher emissions. However, there is considerable variation in the published results, resulting in uncertainty. The purpose of this study is to identify GHG emissions ranges for five conventional and two unconventional crudes by performing an uncertainty analysis using an improved version of the FUNdamental ENgineering PrinciplEs-based ModeL for Estimation of GreenHouse Gases (FUNNEL-GHG). Distributions for key inputs in the Monte Carlo simulation were determined based on values obtained from the literature. Eleven scenarios were developed, nine historical and two current, the former using life-long average production data from the oil fields studied and the latter using recent production data to illustrate how WTC emissions change as the fields age. The mean WTC emissions ranges for the eleven scenarios are 97.5-140 gCO(2)eq/MJ. The uncertainty in the WTC emissions ranges from +/- 3% to +/- 11%. The largest source of uncertainty in the WTC emissions is from the venting, fugitive, and flaring volumes, fluid injection rates, and refinery yields. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:475 / 486
页数:12
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]  
Alaska oil and gas conservation commission, 2001, 341D AL DEP ADM AL O
[2]  
Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, 2004, AOGCC POOL STAT PRUD
[3]  
Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, 2016, AL OIL NGL PROD DEC
[4]  
Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, 2004, PRUDH BAY FEILD PRUD
[5]  
Angevine G, 2012, ENSURING CANADIAN AC, P1
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2014, The Chemistry and Technologyof Petroleum, DOI DOI 10.1201/B16559
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2013, CLIM CHANG
[8]  
Aspen Technology Inc, 2016, ASP HYSYS REF WID MO
[9]  
Bergerson J, 2015, PETROLEUM REFINERY L
[10]   Uncertainty in Regional-Average Petroleum GHG Intensities: Countering Information Gaps with Targeted Data Gathering [J].
Brandt, Adam R. ;
Sun, Yuchi ;
Vafi, Kourosh .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2015, 49 (01) :679-686