Suppr超能文献

从生命周期评估角度看,如何优化利用能源化废物。

Optimal utilization of waste-to-energy in an LCA perspective.

机构信息

Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark.

出版信息

Waste Manag. 2011 Mar;31(3):572-82. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2010.09.009.

Abstract

Energy production from two types of municipal solid waste was evaluated using life cycle assessment (LCA): (1) mixed high calorific waste suitable for production of solid recovered fuels (SRF) and (2) source separated organic waste. For SRF, co-combustion was compared with mass burn incineration. For organic waste, anaerobic digestion (AD) was compared with mass burn incineration. In the case of mass burn incineration, incineration with and without energy recovery was modelled. Biogas produced from anaerobic digestion was evaluated for use both as transportation fuel and for heat and power production. All relevant consequences for energy and resource consumptions, emissions to air, water and soil, upstream processes and downstream processes were included in the LCA. Energy substitutions were considered with respect to two different energy systems: a present-day Danish system based on fossil fuels and a potential future system based on 100% renewable energy. It was found that mass burn incineration of SRF with energy recovery provided savings in all impact categories, but co-combustion was better with respect to Global Warming (GW). If all heat from incineration could be utilized, however, the two alternatives were comparable for SRF. For organic waste, mass burn incineration with energy recovery was preferable over anaerobic digestion in most impact categories. Waste composition and flue gas cleaning at co-combustion plants were critical for the environmental performance of SRF treatment, while the impacts related to utilization of the digestate were significant for the outcome of organic waste treatment. The conclusions were robust in a present-day as well as in a future energy system. This indicated that mass burn incineration with efficient energy recovery is a very environmentally competitive solution overall.

摘要

使用生命周期评价(LCA)评估了两种类型的城市固体废物的能源生产:(1)适合生产固体回收燃料(SRF)的混合高热值废物,以及(2)已分类的有机废物。对于 SRF,比较了共燃与批量燃烧焚烧。对于有机废物,比较了厌氧消化(AD)与批量燃烧焚烧。在批量燃烧焚烧的情况下,模拟了带和不带能量回收的焚烧。评估了从厌氧消化中产生的沼气,用于交通燃料以及热力和电力生产。LCA 包括了与能源和资源消耗、空气、水和土壤排放、上游过程和下游过程相关的所有后果。考虑了与两个不同的能源系统有关的能源替代:基于化石燃料的当今丹麦系统和基于 100%可再生能源的潜在未来系统。结果发现,带能量回收的 SRF 批量燃烧焚烧在所有影响类别中都提供了节约,但在全球变暖(GW)方面共燃更好。然而,如果可以利用焚烧的所有热量,则两种替代方案在 SRF 方面具有可比性。对于有机废物,带能量回收的批量燃烧焚烧在大多数影响类别中优于厌氧消化。在共燃厂中,废物组成和废气清洁对于 SRF 处理的环境性能至关重要,而消化物利用相关的影响对于有机废物处理的结果也很重要。这些结论在当今和未来的能源系统中都是稳健的。这表明,带高效能量回收的批量燃烧焚烧总体上是一种极具环境竞争力的解决方案。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验