Comparative environmental benefits of power generation from underground and surface coal gasification with carbon capture and storage

被引:20
作者
Feng, Ye [1 ,2 ]
Yang, Bo [3 ]
Hou, Yunbing [1 ]
Duan, Tian-Hong [6 ]
Yang, Lai [2 ,4 ,5 ]
Wang, Yixuan [2 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] China Univ Min & Technol, Sch Energy & Min Engn, Beijing 100083, Peoples R China
[2] Beijing Inst Technol, Ctr Energy & Environm Policy Res, Beijing 100181, Peoples R China
[3] Tsinghua Univ, Sch Environm, Div Air Pollut & Its Control, Beijing 100084, Peoples R China
[4] Beijing Inst Technol, Sch Management & Econ, Beijing 100181, Peoples R China
[5] Beijing Key Lab Energy Econ & Environm Management, Beijing 100081, Peoples R China
[6] China Univ Min & Technol, Sch Mines, Xuzhou 221116, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金; 国家重点研发计划;
关键词
Underground coal gasification; Underground gasification combined cycle; Life cycle assessment; Environmental benefit; Carbon capture and storage; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; HYDROGEN-PRODUCTION; CO2; CAPTURE; PLANTS; CCS; OPPORTUNITIES; TECHNOLOGIES; IMPACT; ENERGY; UCG;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127383
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Underground gasification combined cycle (UGCC), when combined with carbon capture and storage (CCS), is widely judged to be a promising approach for clean coal utilization especially in the context of carbon neutral energy pathways. Nevertheless, the overall operation processes may consume a multiple of energy and inevitably trigger environmental concerns. Hence, a careful evaluation of the potential environmental impacts associated with UGCC is needed. In this study, we assessed environmental impacts of UGCC with and without CCS by the life cycle assessment method, and compared the results with those of surface integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) to gain better insight into tradeoffs of two coal gasification technologies and lighten the environmental burden by design optimizations. The results demonstrated that most mid-point impact values of UGCC power plants, which reflect pollution emissions and corresponding damage degree, were lower. Inversely, the global warming potential was 16.9% higher than those of IGCC power plants. Furthermore, UGCC power plants have superior end-point environmental benefits, which represent the damage of ecosystem quality, human health and resources. As demonstrated by the fact that the value of above three impact types were 23%, 15% and 4%, lower than those of IGCC power plants, respectively. In addition, the implement of CCS in two types of power plants decreased human health damage due to reduced greenhouse gas emissions, but notable environmental trade-offs are the increase in ecosystem quality damage and resource damage. The aggregated results show that UGCC with or without CCS has a more outstanding environmental performance with exception of global warming potential than IGCC with or without CCS. Enhancing UCG process control, improving syngas heating value and decreasing the energy in gasification agent preparation are effective methods to further reduce the GHG emissions. Approached in an improved way, UGCC-CCS stands to provide a low-carbon and self-contained solution for power production and energy provision.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 69 条
  • [11] Comparison of three different LCIA methods: EDIP97, CML2001 and Eco-indicator 99 - Does it matter which one you choose?
    Dreyer, LC
    Niemann, AL
    Hauschild, MZ
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2003, 8 (04) : 191 - 200
  • [12] Experimental Study of Coal Pyrolysis under the Simulated High Temperature and High-Stress Conditions of Underground Coal Gasification
    Duan, Tian-Hong
    Wang, Zuo-Tang
    Liu, Zhen-Jia
    Chen, Ya-Zhou
    Fu, Zhen-Bin
    [J]. ENERGY & FUELS, 2017, 31 (02) : 1147 - 1158
  • [13] Pyrolysis and gasification modelling of underground coal gasification and the optimisation of CO2 as a gasification agent
    Duan, Tian-Hong
    Lu, Cai-Ping
    Xiong, Sheng
    Fu, Zhen-Bin
    Chen, Ya-Zhou
    [J]. FUEL, 2016, 183 : 557 - 567
  • [14] Evaluation of synthetic gas harmful effects created at the underground coal gasification process realized in laboratory conditions
    Durdan, Milan
    Laciak, Marek
    Kacur, Jan
    Flegner, Patrik
    Kostur, Karol
    [J]. MEASUREMENT, 2019, 147
  • [15] Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment
    Finnveden, Goran
    Hauschild, Michael Z.
    Ekvall, Tomas
    Guinee, Jeroen
    Heijungs, Reinout
    Hellweg, Stefanie
    Koehler, Annette
    Pennington, David
    Suh, Sangwon
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2009, 91 (01) : 1 - 21
  • [16] Prospects for underground coal gasification in carbon-constrained world
    Friedmann, S. Julio
    Upadhye, Ravi
    Kong, Fung-Ming
    [J]. GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES 9, 2009, 1 (01): : 4551 - 4557
  • [17] [葛世荣 Ge Shirong], 2017, [中国矿业大学学报. 自然科学版, Journal of China University of Mining & Technology], V46, P679
  • [19] Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in life cycle assessment
    Hellweg, Stefanie
    Mila i Canals, Llorenc
    [J]. SCIENCE, 2014, 344 (6188) : 1109 - 1113
  • [20] Hofstetter P., 1998, Perspectives in life cycle impact assessment: A Structured Approach to Combine Models of the Technospere, Ecosphere, and Valuesphere