• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评估中国生物质能和煤炭火力发电的环境外部性:基于供应链的视角。

Assessing the environmental externalities for biomass- and coal-fired electricity generation in China: A supply chain perspective.

机构信息

College of Economics and Management & Research Center for Soft Energy Science, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, 210016, China.

State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China.

出版信息

J Environ Manage. 2019 Sep 15;246:758-767. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.06.047. Epub 2019 Jun 19.

DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.06.047
PMID:31228689
Abstract

Biomass power in China is usually regarded as less economically competitive than coal power, partially because the external costs of power generation technologies' effects on human health and the environment are always neglected. To understand the real economic performance of biomass- and coal-fired power in China, a hybrid life cycle inventory modeling approach was developed to estimate the fuel-to-electricity environmental emissions and complete (direct and external) economic costs of the two fuel options. The results show that the direct economic cost of biomass power is 0.44 Chinese yuan (CNY) per kilowatt-hour, about 25%-37% higher than that of coal power. However, because of the significant emissions of greenhouse gas and PM pollutants during power generation, the external cost of coal-fired power is estimated at 0.17 CNY/kWh on average, substantially higher than that of biomass power (0.06 CNY/kWh). Thus, the economic situations of biomass power reverse when environmental externalities are considered. Specially, wood residue-fired electricity has the lowest complete economic cost (0.48 CNY/kWh), approximately 2%-14% less than that of coal power. Therefore, a reasonable and comprehensive cost accounting mechanism is crucial for the development of the biomass power sector in China. Additionally, win-win policies could be developed to improve the environmental and economic performance of the country's power generation industry.

摘要

在中国,生物质能通常被认为不如煤炭经济竞争力强,部分原因是人们总是忽略了发电技术对人类健康和环境的外部成本。为了了解生物质能和燃煤发电的真实经济表现,开发了一种混合生命周期清单建模方法来估算两种燃料方案的燃料到电力的环境排放和完整(直接和外部)经济成本。结果表明,生物质能的直接经济成本为每千瓦时 0.44 元人民币,比煤炭发电高 25%-37%左右。然而,由于发电过程中温室气体和 PM 污染物的大量排放,燃煤发电的外部成本平均估计为每千瓦时 0.17 元人民币,远高于生物质能的外部成本(每千瓦时 0.06 元人民币)。因此,当考虑环境外部性时,生物质能的经济情况会发生逆转。特别是,木质残余物发电的完整经济成本最低(每千瓦时 0.48 元人民币),比煤炭发电低 2%-14%左右。因此,对于中国生物质能发电部门的发展,建立合理和全面的成本核算机制至关重要。此外,可以制定双赢政策来提高国家发电行业的环境和经济绩效。

相似文献

1
Assessing the environmental externalities for biomass- and coal-fired electricity generation in China: A supply chain perspective.评估中国生物质能和煤炭火力发电的环境外部性:基于供应链的视角。
J Environ Manage. 2019 Sep 15;246:758-767. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.06.047. Epub 2019 Jun 19.
2
Costs and Benefits of Installing Flue-Gas Desulfurization Units at Coal-Fired Power Plants in India印度燃煤电厂安装烟气脱硫装置的成本与效益
3
Life cycle cost analysis of solar energy via environmental externality monetization.通过环境外部性货币化对太阳能进行生命周期成本分析。
Sci Total Environ. 2023 Jan 15;856(Pt 1):158910. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158910. Epub 2022 Sep 21.
4
Benefits of current and future policies on emissions of China's coal-fired power sector indicated by continuous emission monitoring.连续排放监测表明中国燃煤发电行业现行和未来政策的排放效益。
Environ Pollut. 2019 Aug;251:415-424. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.05.021. Epub 2019 May 8.
5
Implications of Generation Efficiencies and Supply Chain Leaks for the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Natural Gas-Fired Electricity in the United States.美国天然气火力发电生命周期温室气体排放的代用效率和供应链泄漏的影响。
Environ Sci Technol. 2022 Feb 15;56(4):2540-2550. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.1c05246. Epub 2022 Feb 2.
6
Environmental and economic evaluation of bioenergy in Ontario, Canada.加拿大安大略省生物能源的环境与经济评估
J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2007 Aug;57(8):919-33. doi: 10.3155/1047-3289.57.8.919.
7
Economic analysis of atmospheric mercury emission control for coal-fired power plants in China.中国燃煤电厂大气汞排放控制的经济分析。
J Environ Sci (China). 2015 Jul 1;33:125-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jes.2015.02.003. Epub 2015 May 5.
8
Economic value of U.S. fossil fuel electricity health impacts.美国化石燃料发电对健康影响的经济价值。
Environ Int. 2013 Feb;52:75-80. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2012.03.003. Epub 2012 Dec 13.
9
Achieving Zero/Negative-Emissions Coal-Fired Power Plants Using Amine-Based Postcombustion CO Capture Technology and Biomass Cocombustion.采用基于胺的燃烧后 CO2 捕集技术和生物质混烧实现零/负排放燃煤电厂。
Environ Sci Technol. 2020 Feb 18;54(4):2429-2438. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.9b07388. Epub 2020 Feb 7.
10
Mapping the economy of coal power plants retrofitted with post-combustion and biomass co-firing carbon capture in China.在中国,对燃煤电厂进行后燃烧和生物质混烧碳捕集改造的经济分析。
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2023 Apr;30(16):47438-47454. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-25381-2. Epub 2023 Feb 4.

引用本文的文献

1
Sustainable bioenergy contributes to cost-effective climate change mitigation in China.可持续生物能源有助于中国以具有成本效益的方式缓解气候变化。
iScience. 2024 Jun 9;27(7):110232. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.110232. eCollection 2024 Jul 19.
2
Spatial Spillover Effects of Directed Technical Change on Urban Carbon Intensity, Based on 283 Cities in China from 2008 to 2019.基于 2008 年至 2019 年中国 283 个城市的数据分析,探讨了有目的的技术变革对城市碳强度的空间溢出效应。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 1;19(3):1679. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19031679.
3
Substantial Changes of Gaseous Pollutants and Health Effects During the COVID-19 Lockdown Period Across China.
中国新冠疫情封锁期间气态污染物的显著变化及其对健康的影响
Geohealth. 2021 May 1;5(5):e2021GH000408. doi: 10.1029/2021GH000408. eCollection 2021 May.
4
A Review of Key Technologies and Trends in the Development of Integrated Heating and Power Systems in Agriculture.农业综合供热供电系统发展的关键技术与趋势综述
Entropy (Basel). 2021 Feb 23;23(2):260. doi: 10.3390/e23020260.
5
Evolution of External Health Costs of Electricity Generation in the Baltic States.波罗的海国家发电的外部健康成本演变。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jul 22;17(15):5265. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17155265.