Multi-dimensional performance evaluation of straw heat utilization scenarios based on transportation and boiler type

IF 9 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENERGY & FUELS
Tong Li , Guoxia Wei , Hanqiao Liu , Yuwen Zhu , Yongyue Gong , Tong Liu , Youcheng Zhang
{"title":"Multi-dimensional performance evaluation of straw heat utilization scenarios based on transportation and boiler type","authors":"Tong Li ,&nbsp;Guoxia Wei ,&nbsp;Hanqiao Liu ,&nbsp;Yuwen Zhu ,&nbsp;Yongyue Gong ,&nbsp;Tong Liu ,&nbsp;Youcheng Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.energy.2025.136608","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Biomass energy utilization is one of the effective technological ways to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality. Different scenarios for heat utilization of straw in China, namely straw pellet fuel boiler for heating, straw gasifier for cogeneration and straw direct combustion boilers for cogeneration (circulating fluidized bed, water-cooled vibrating grate and combined grate) and were evaluated and compared by energy flow analysis (EFA), life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) methods. The system boundary includes two stages: (Ⅰ) straw collection, processing and transportation; (Ⅱ) straw energy conversion. EFA results show that the heat utilization efficiency of corn straw direct combustion cogeneration scenarios is 35.50 %–39.81 %, which is higher than the 30.13 % of the gasification cogeneration scenarios. LCA results show that the straw direct combustion cogeneration scenarios is more environmentally friendly, in which the combined grate exhibits the lowest environmental impact with an ECER value of −2.8 × 10<sup>−9</sup>. LCC results show that the combined grate scenario has the lowest economic cost of −165.05 RMB, but the payback time as 16 years. The straw heating scenario has the highest economic cost of −66.89 RMB, but it only takes 7 years to break even. Overall, combined grate cogeneration is more environmentally friendly, but less economically sustainable. Transportation accounts for 2.3 %–3.8 % of the environmental impact throughout the entire lifecycle and increases with factory scale.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11647,"journal":{"name":"Energy","volume":"328 ","pages":"Article 136608"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544225022509","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Biomass energy utilization is one of the effective technological ways to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality. Different scenarios for heat utilization of straw in China, namely straw pellet fuel boiler for heating, straw gasifier for cogeneration and straw direct combustion boilers for cogeneration (circulating fluidized bed, water-cooled vibrating grate and combined grate) and were evaluated and compared by energy flow analysis (EFA), life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) methods. The system boundary includes two stages: (Ⅰ) straw collection, processing and transportation; (Ⅱ) straw energy conversion. EFA results show that the heat utilization efficiency of corn straw direct combustion cogeneration scenarios is 35.50 %–39.81 %, which is higher than the 30.13 % of the gasification cogeneration scenarios. LCA results show that the straw direct combustion cogeneration scenarios is more environmentally friendly, in which the combined grate exhibits the lowest environmental impact with an ECER value of −2.8 × 10−9. LCC results show that the combined grate scenario has the lowest economic cost of −165.05 RMB, but the payback time as 16 years. The straw heating scenario has the highest economic cost of −66.89 RMB, but it only takes 7 years to break even. Overall, combined grate cogeneration is more environmentally friendly, but less economically sustainable. Transportation accounts for 2.3 %–3.8 % of the environmental impact throughout the entire lifecycle and increases with factory scale.
基于运输和锅炉类型的秸秆热利用方案多维性能评价
生物质能利用是实现碳中和目标的有效技术途径之一。采用能量流分析(EFA)、生命周期评估(LCA)和生命周期成本计算(LCC)等方法,对中国秸秆热利用的不同方案,即秸秆颗粒燃料锅炉供热、秸秆气化炉热电联产和秸秆直接燃烧锅炉热电联产(循环流化床、水冷振动篦和组合篦)进行了评价和比较。系统边界包括两个阶段:(Ⅰ)秸秆收集、加工和运输;(Ⅱ)秸秆能量转换。EFA结果表明,玉米秸秆直接燃烧热电联产情景的热利用效率为35.50% ~ 39.81%,高于气化热电联产情景的30.13%。LCA结果表明,秸秆直接燃烧热电联产方案更加环保,其中组合式炉排对环境的影响最小,ECER值为−2.8 × 10−9。LCC结果表明,组合炉排方案经济成本最低,为- 165.05元,投资回收期为16年。秸秆加热方案的经济成本最高,为- 66.89元,但只需要7年就能实现收支平衡。总的来说,联合炉排热电联产更环保,但在经济上的可持续性较差。运输在整个生命周期中占环境影响的2.3% - 3.8%,并随着工厂规模的扩大而增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Energy
Energy 工程技术-能源与燃料
CiteScore
15.30
自引率
14.40%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14.2 weeks
期刊介绍: Energy is a multidisciplinary, international journal that publishes research and analysis in the field of energy engineering. Our aim is to become a leading peer-reviewed platform and a trusted source of information for energy-related topics. The journal covers a range of areas including mechanical engineering, thermal sciences, and energy analysis. We are particularly interested in research on energy modelling, prediction, integrated energy systems, planning, and management. Additionally, we welcome papers on energy conservation, efficiency, biomass and bioenergy, renewable energy, electricity supply and demand, energy storage, buildings, and economic and policy issues. These topics should align with our broader multidisciplinary focus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信