我国燃煤电厂超低排放前后电除尘器能效对比分析

IF 2.7 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENERGY & FUELS
Hanxiao Liu, Shuiyuan Luo, Lin Zhao, Yunjin Hu, Ying Cui, Jun Liang, Xiaowei Liu
{"title":"我国燃煤电厂超低排放前后电除尘器能效对比分析","authors":"Hanxiao Liu,&nbsp;Shuiyuan Luo,&nbsp;Lin Zhao,&nbsp;Yunjin Hu,&nbsp;Ying Cui,&nbsp;Jun Liang,&nbsp;Xiaowei Liu","doi":"10.1002/ghg.2216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Electrostatic precipitator (ESP) is the main equipment for flue dust control of coal-fired power plants in China, accounting for about 70% of the total currently. In this paper, energy efficiency data of ESP, including 202 sets before ultra-low emission and 45 sets after ultra-low emission are systematically studied and analyzed by using the research method of field testing and technical investigation. The results showed that after ultra-low emission, the energy consumption and converted CO<sub>2</sub> emission of ESP in coal-fired power plants increased significantly, and the specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass particulate matter (PM) removal increased by 49.61% and 139%, respectively, and the converted CO<sub>2</sub> emission increased by 1.67 × 10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup> and 31.12 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/t PM on average. The energy consumption of low-low-temperature ESP (LLT-ESP) was positively correlated with its emission reduction range. Before and after the gas cooler operation, the power consumption, specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass PM removal increased by 8.06%–38.68%, 10.66%–60.14% and 7.23%–62.98%, respectively, and the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions corresponded increased by 26.29–691.81 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/h, 0.46–2.18×10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup>, 1.10–23.62 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/t PM, respectively. LLT-ESP had a great possibility to optimize the operation for energy-saving and carbon-reduction, because when the high voltage power supply operated on the maximum output mode and the energy-saving mode, the drop of power consumption and specific power consumption was around 52.00%–58.23%, 52.02%–58.29%, respectively, and the CO<sub>2</sub> emission reductions corresponded was 1,039.25–1,359.35 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/h, 2.71–3.58×10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup>, respectively. LLT-ESP also had the great optimizing possibility for energy-saving and carbon-reduction during low load operation, as when the load reduced from 100% to 50%, the specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass PM removal increased by 5.05%–45.50%, 6.59%–63.90%, respectively, and the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions corresponded increased by 0.38–2.44×10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup>, 6.76–45.98 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/h, respectively. The operation energy consumption can be effectively reduced by integrated use of multiple electric dust removal technologies, such as compared with LLT-ESP technology, the power consumption, specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass PM removal of “low-low-temperature + moving electrode+ electrostatic agglomeration” decreased by 37.88%, 30.08% and 45.29% respectively, and the corresponding CO<sub>2</sub> emission decreased by 697.22 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/h, 1.87×10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup> and 32.98 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/t PM, respectively. The current national standard GB 37484-2019 is no longer applicable to the energy efficiency evaluation of the ESP in ultra-low emission units. This study can provide data support for the revision of national standard GB 37484-2019 and the collaborative efficiency of coal power plant pollution reduction and carbon reduction. © 2023 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</p>","PeriodicalId":12796,"journal":{"name":"Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology","volume":"13 3","pages":"450-469"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of energy efficiency of electrostatic precipitator before and after ultralow emission in coal-fired power plants in China\",\"authors\":\"Hanxiao Liu,&nbsp;Shuiyuan Luo,&nbsp;Lin Zhao,&nbsp;Yunjin Hu,&nbsp;Ying Cui,&nbsp;Jun Liang,&nbsp;Xiaowei Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ghg.2216\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Electrostatic precipitator (ESP) is the main equipment for flue dust control of coal-fired power plants in China, accounting for about 70% of the total currently. In this paper, energy efficiency data of ESP, including 202 sets before ultra-low emission and 45 sets after ultra-low emission are systematically studied and analyzed by using the research method of field testing and technical investigation. The results showed that after ultra-low emission, the energy consumption and converted CO<sub>2</sub> emission of ESP in coal-fired power plants increased significantly, and the specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass particulate matter (PM) removal increased by 49.61% and 139%, respectively, and the converted CO<sub>2</sub> emission increased by 1.67 × 10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup> and 31.12 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/t PM on average. The energy consumption of low-low-temperature ESP (LLT-ESP) was positively correlated with its emission reduction range. Before and after the gas cooler operation, the power consumption, specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass PM removal increased by 8.06%–38.68%, 10.66%–60.14% and 7.23%–62.98%, respectively, and the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions corresponded increased by 26.29–691.81 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/h, 0.46–2.18×10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup>, 1.10–23.62 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/t PM, respectively. LLT-ESP had a great possibility to optimize the operation for energy-saving and carbon-reduction, because when the high voltage power supply operated on the maximum output mode and the energy-saving mode, the drop of power consumption and specific power consumption was around 52.00%–58.23%, 52.02%–58.29%, respectively, and the CO<sub>2</sub> emission reductions corresponded was 1,039.25–1,359.35 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/h, 2.71–3.58×10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup>, respectively. LLT-ESP also had the great optimizing possibility for energy-saving and carbon-reduction during low load operation, as when the load reduced from 100% to 50%, the specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass PM removal increased by 5.05%–45.50%, 6.59%–63.90%, respectively, and the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions corresponded increased by 0.38–2.44×10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup>, 6.76–45.98 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/h, respectively. The operation energy consumption can be effectively reduced by integrated use of multiple electric dust removal technologies, such as compared with LLT-ESP technology, the power consumption, specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass PM removal of “low-low-temperature + moving electrode+ electrostatic agglomeration” decreased by 37.88%, 30.08% and 45.29% respectively, and the corresponding CO<sub>2</sub> emission decreased by 697.22 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/h, 1.87×10<sup>−4</sup> kg CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup> and 32.98 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/t PM, respectively. The current national standard GB 37484-2019 is no longer applicable to the energy efficiency evaluation of the ESP in ultra-low emission units. This study can provide data support for the revision of national standard GB 37484-2019 and the collaborative efficiency of coal power plant pollution reduction and carbon reduction. © 2023 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology\",\"volume\":\"13 3\",\"pages\":\"450-469\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ghg.2216\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ghg.2216","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

电除尘器(ESP)是中国燃煤电厂烟气治理的主要设备,目前约占总量的70%。本文采用现场试验和技术调研相结合的研究方法,对超低排放前202台和超低排放后45台ESP的能效数据进行了系统的研究和分析。结果表明,燃煤电厂ESP超低排放后能耗和转化CO2排放量显著增加,单位质量颗粒物(PM)去除的比电耗和能耗分别增加49.61%和139%,转化CO2排放量平均增加1.67 × 10−4 kg CO2/m3和31.12 kg CO2/t PM。低温电除尘器的能耗与其减排幅度呈正相关。燃气冷却器运行前后,其电耗、比电耗和单位质量PM脱除能耗分别增加8.06% ~ 38.68%、10.66% ~ 60.14%和7.23% ~ 62.98%,相应的CO2排放量分别增加26.29 ~ 691.81 kg CO2/h、0.46-2.18×10−4 kg CO2/m3、1.10 ~ 23.62 kg CO2/t PM。高压电源工作在最大输出模式和节能模式时,电耗和比耗下降幅度分别为52.00% ~ 58.23%、52.02% ~ 58.29%,相应的CO2减排幅度分别为1039.25 ~ 135.35 kg CO2/h、2.71-3.58×10−4 kg CO2/m3, LLT-ESP节能减排的可能性较大。低负荷运行时,LLT-ESP在节能减碳方面也具有较大的优化可能性,当负荷从100%降至50%时,单位质量PM去除的比功耗和能耗分别增加5.05% ~ 45.50%、6.59% ~ 63.90%,相应的CO2排放量分别增加0.38-2.44×10−4 kg CO2/m3、6.76 ~ 45.98 kg CO2/h。综合使用多种电除尘技术可有效降低运行能耗,如与LLT-ESP技术相比,“低低温+移动电极+静电团聚”单位质量PM去除的电耗、比电耗和能耗分别降低了37.88%、30.08%和45.29%,相应的CO2排放量降低了697.22 kg CO2/h;1.87×10−4 kg CO2/m3和32.98 kg CO2/t PM。现行国家标准GB 37484-2019不再适用超低排放机组电潜泵能效评价。本研究可为GB 37484-2019国家标准制修订及燃煤电厂污染减排与碳减排协同效率研究提供数据支持。©2023化学工业协会和John Wiley &儿子,有限公司
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative analysis of energy efficiency of electrostatic precipitator before and after ultralow emission in coal-fired power plants in China

Electrostatic precipitator (ESP) is the main equipment for flue dust control of coal-fired power plants in China, accounting for about 70% of the total currently. In this paper, energy efficiency data of ESP, including 202 sets before ultra-low emission and 45 sets after ultra-low emission are systematically studied and analyzed by using the research method of field testing and technical investigation. The results showed that after ultra-low emission, the energy consumption and converted CO2 emission of ESP in coal-fired power plants increased significantly, and the specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass particulate matter (PM) removal increased by 49.61% and 139%, respectively, and the converted CO2 emission increased by 1.67 × 10−4 kg CO2/m3 and 31.12 kg CO2/t PM on average. The energy consumption of low-low-temperature ESP (LLT-ESP) was positively correlated with its emission reduction range. Before and after the gas cooler operation, the power consumption, specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass PM removal increased by 8.06%–38.68%, 10.66%–60.14% and 7.23%–62.98%, respectively, and the CO2 emissions corresponded increased by 26.29–691.81 kg CO2/h, 0.46–2.18×10−4 kg CO2/m3, 1.10–23.62 kg CO2/t PM, respectively. LLT-ESP had a great possibility to optimize the operation for energy-saving and carbon-reduction, because when the high voltage power supply operated on the maximum output mode and the energy-saving mode, the drop of power consumption and specific power consumption was around 52.00%–58.23%, 52.02%–58.29%, respectively, and the CO2 emission reductions corresponded was 1,039.25–1,359.35 kg CO2/h, 2.71–3.58×10−4 kg CO2/m3, respectively. LLT-ESP also had the great optimizing possibility for energy-saving and carbon-reduction during low load operation, as when the load reduced from 100% to 50%, the specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass PM removal increased by 5.05%–45.50%, 6.59%–63.90%, respectively, and the CO2 emissions corresponded increased by 0.38–2.44×10−4 kg CO2/m3, 6.76–45.98 kg CO2/h, respectively. The operation energy consumption can be effectively reduced by integrated use of multiple electric dust removal technologies, such as compared with LLT-ESP technology, the power consumption, specific power consumption and energy consumption corresponding to unit mass PM removal of “low-low-temperature + moving electrode+ electrostatic agglomeration” decreased by 37.88%, 30.08% and 45.29% respectively, and the corresponding CO2 emission decreased by 697.22 kg CO2/h, 1.87×10−4 kg CO2/m3 and 32.98 kg CO2/t PM, respectively. The current national standard GB 37484-2019 is no longer applicable to the energy efficiency evaluation of the ESP in ultra-low emission units. This study can provide data support for the revision of national standard GB 37484-2019 and the collaborative efficiency of coal power plant pollution reduction and carbon reduction. © 2023 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology
Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology ENERGY & FUELS-ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
55
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology is a new online-only scientific journal dedicated to the management of greenhouse gases. The journal will focus on methods for carbon capture and storage (CCS), as well as utilization of carbon dioxide (CO2) as a feedstock for fuels and chemicals. GHG will also provide insight into strategies to mitigate emissions of other greenhouse gases. Significant advances will be explored in critical reviews, commentary articles and short communications of broad interest. In addition, the journal will offer analyses of relevant economic and political issues, industry developments and case studies. Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology is an exciting new online-only journal published as a co-operative venture of the SCI (Society of Chemical Industry) and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
×
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