Thermodynamic, economic and environmental assessment of advanced transcritical CO2 supermarket refrigeration architectures with maintenance-cost sensitivity analysis

IF 10.7 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Journal of Cleaner Production Pub Date : 2026-10-14 Epub Date: 2026-10-03 DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2026.149572
Miguel Ferro, Sandrina Pereira, Luís Filipe Baptista, Luis Alfonso Díaz-Secades
{"title":"Thermodynamic, economic and environmental assessment of advanced transcritical CO2 supermarket refrigeration architectures with maintenance-cost sensitivity analysis","authors":"Miguel Ferro,&nbsp;Sandrina Pereira,&nbsp;Luís Filipe Baptista,&nbsp;Luis Alfonso Díaz-Secades","doi":"10.1016/j.jclepro.2026.149572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Modern supermarket refrigeration systems are progressively transitioning toward low-global-warming-potential solutions, with transcritical CO<sub>2</sub> architectures emerging as promising alternatives to conventional synthetic refrigerants. However, the thermodynamically optimal refrigeration technology may not necessarily coincide with the most suitable solution for industrial implementation. This study compares a conventional booster cycle (BC), a parallel-compression system (PC), and a booster cycle with low-pressure ejectors (BLPE) through a thermodynamic, economic, environmental, and dual-layer multi-criteria assessment. Annual simulations are performed using location-specific outdoor dry-bulb temperature profiles for Berlin (Germany), Lisbon (Portugal), Albuquerque (United States), and Singapore under a fixed supermarket load profile, while LCC, TEWI, and the quantitative technical-MCDM assessment are restricted to the Lisbon reference case. Relative to BC, model-predicted annual electricity-consumption reductions range from 10.55% to 11.68% for PC and from 12.38% to 12.62% for BLPE. In Lisbon, PC and BLPE reduce LCC by 7.11% and 8.74%, respectively, and TEWI by 10.80% and 12.50%. BLPE therefore provides the best quantitative technical performance, although its baseline LCC advantage over PC is eliminated by an additional annual maintenance-cost premium of approximately 803 Euro/year. In contrast, the expert-informed adoption-readiness layer ranks PC first; PC occupies first position in 85.5% of bootstrap expert-resampling realizations and in 99.293–99.957% of Monte Carlo criterion-weight realizations across TOPSIS, VIKOR, and EDAS. These results indicate that thermodynamic superiority and industrial adoption readiness may diverge, and that maintenance-cost tolerance and implementation perceptions should be considered alongside modeled performance when selecting advanced CO<sub>2</sub> refrigeration architectures.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":349,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cleaner Production","volume":"579 ","pages":"Article 149572"},"PeriodicalIF":10.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cleaner Production","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095965262602113X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/10/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Modern supermarket refrigeration systems are progressively transitioning toward low-global-warming-potential solutions, with transcritical CO2 architectures emerging as promising alternatives to conventional synthetic refrigerants. However, the thermodynamically optimal refrigeration technology may not necessarily coincide with the most suitable solution for industrial implementation. This study compares a conventional booster cycle (BC), a parallel-compression system (PC), and a booster cycle with low-pressure ejectors (BLPE) through a thermodynamic, economic, environmental, and dual-layer multi-criteria assessment. Annual simulations are performed using location-specific outdoor dry-bulb temperature profiles for Berlin (Germany), Lisbon (Portugal), Albuquerque (United States), and Singapore under a fixed supermarket load profile, while LCC, TEWI, and the quantitative technical-MCDM assessment are restricted to the Lisbon reference case. Relative to BC, model-predicted annual electricity-consumption reductions range from 10.55% to 11.68% for PC and from 12.38% to 12.62% for BLPE. In Lisbon, PC and BLPE reduce LCC by 7.11% and 8.74%, respectively, and TEWI by 10.80% and 12.50%. BLPE therefore provides the best quantitative technical performance, although its baseline LCC advantage over PC is eliminated by an additional annual maintenance-cost premium of approximately 803 Euro/year. In contrast, the expert-informed adoption-readiness layer ranks PC first; PC occupies first position in 85.5% of bootstrap expert-resampling realizations and in 99.293–99.957% of Monte Carlo criterion-weight realizations across TOPSIS, VIKOR, and EDAS. These results indicate that thermodynamic superiority and industrial adoption readiness may diverge, and that maintenance-cost tolerance and implementation perceptions should be considered alongside modeled performance when selecting advanced CO2 refrigeration architectures.
先进的跨临界CO2超市制冷结构的热力学、经济和环境评价及维护成本敏感性分析
现代超市制冷系统正逐步向低全球变暖潜势的解决方案过渡,跨临界二氧化碳结构正成为传统合成制冷剂的有希望的替代品。然而,热力学最优的制冷技术不一定符合最适合工业实施的解决方案。本研究通过热力学、经济、环境和双层多标准评估,比较了传统增压循环(BC)、平行压缩系统(PC)和低压喷射器增压循环(BLPE)。使用柏林(德国)、里斯本(葡萄牙)、阿尔伯克基(美国)和新加坡在固定超市负荷情况下的特定地点室外干球温度曲线进行年度模拟,而LCC、TEWI和定量技术- mcdm评估仅限于里斯本参考案例。与BC相比,模型预测PC的年用电量减少幅度为10.55%至11.68%,而BLPE的年用电量减少幅度为12.38%至12.62%。在里斯本,PC和BLPE分别降低了7.11%和8.74%的LCC,降低了10.80%和12.50%的TEWI。因此,BLPE提供了最佳的定量技术性能,尽管其相对于PC的基线LCC优势被每年约803欧元的额外维护成本溢价所消除。相比之下,专家知情的采用准备层将PC排在第一位;在TOPSIS、VIKOR和EDAS中,PC在85.5%的bootstrap专家重采样实现和99.293-99.957%的蒙特卡罗标准权重实现中占据第一。这些结果表明,热力学优势和工业采用准备程度可能会出现分歧,在选择先进的CO2制冷架构时,除了模型性能外,还应考虑维护成本容忍度和实施感知。
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
Journal of Cleaner Production
Journal of Cleaner Production 环境科学-工程:环境
CiteScore
20.40
自引率
9.00%
发文量
4720
审稿时长
111 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cleaner Production is an international, transdisciplinary journal that addresses and discusses theoretical and practical Cleaner Production, Environmental, and Sustainability issues. It aims to help societies become more sustainable by focusing on the concept of 'Cleaner Production', which aims at preventing waste production and increasing efficiencies in energy, water, resources, and human capital use. The journal serves as a platform for corporations, governments, education institutions, regions, and societies to engage in discussions and research related to Cleaner Production, environmental, and sustainability practices.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书