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
  • [41] Life cycle GHG assessment of fossil fuel power plants with carbon capture and storage
    Odeh, Naser A.
    Cockerill, Timothy T.
    [J]. ENERGY POLICY, 2008, 36 (01) : 367 - 380
  • [42] Carbon capture and storage potential in coal-fired plant in Malaysia-A review
    Oh, Tick Hui
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2010, 14 (09) : 2697 - 2709
  • [43] Techno-economic assessment of hydrogen production from underground coal gasification (UCG) in Western Canada with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) for upgrading bitumen from oil sands
    Olateju, Babatunde
    Kumar, Amit
    [J]. APPLIED ENERGY, 2013, 111 : 428 - 440
  • [44] Performance of water gas shift reaction catalysts: A review
    Pal, D. B.
    Chand, R.
    Upadhyay, S. N.
    Mishra, P. K.
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2018, 93 : 549 - 565
  • [45] Life cycle assessment of carbon dioxide capture and storage from lignite power plants
    Pehnt, Martin
    Henkel, Johannes
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL, 2009, 3 (01) : 49 - 66
  • [46] Managing China's coal power plants to address multiple environmental objectives
    Peng, Wei
    Wagner, Fabian
    Ramana, M., V
    Zhai, Haibo
    Sma, Mitchell J.
    Dalin, Carole
    Zhang, Xin
    Mauzerall, Denise L.
    [J]. NATURE SUSTAINABILITY, 2018, 1 (11): : 693 - 701
  • [47] Underground coal gasification - Part I: Field demonstrations and process performance
    Perkins, Greg
    [J]. PROGRESS IN ENERGY AND COMBUSTION SCIENCE, 2018, 67 : 158 - 187
  • [48] Underground coal gasification - Part II: Fundamental phenomena and modeling
    Perkins, Greg
    [J]. PROGRESS IN ENERGY AND COMBUSTION SCIENCE, 2018, 67 : 234 - 274
  • [49] Life Cycle Assessment for supercritical pulverized coal power plants with post-combustion carbon capture and storage
    Petrescu, Letitia
    Bonalumi, Davide
    Valenti, Gianluca
    Cormos, Ana-Maria
    Cormos, Calin-Cristian
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2017, 157 : 10 - 21
  • [50] Environmental assessment of IGCC power plants with pre-combustion CO2 capture by chemical & calcium looping methods
    Petrescu, Letitia
    Cormos, Calin-Cristian
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2017, 158 : 233 - 244