Life Cycle Assessment and Economic Analysis of Biomass Energy Technology in China: A Brief Review

被引:39
|
作者
Chen, Shuangyin [1 ,2 ]
Feng, He [1 ]
Zheng, Jun [2 ]
Ye, Jianguo [2 ]
Song, Yi [3 ]
Yang, Haiping [4 ]
Zhou, Ming [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Huazhong Univ Sci & Technol, China EU Inst Clean & Renewable Energy, Wuhan 430074, Peoples R China
[2] Inst New Energy, Wuhan 430206, Peoples R China
[3] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Shenzhen 518172, Peoples R China
[4] Huazhong Univ Sci & Technol, State Key Lab Coal Combust, Wuhan 430074, Peoples R China
基金
国家重点研发计划;
关键词
biomass power generation; life cycle assessment; environment load; economic evaluation; POWER-GENERATION; COMBUSTION; CHEMISTRY;
D O I
10.3390/pr8091112
中图分类号
TQ [化学工业];
学科分类号
0817 ;
摘要
This study describes the technological processes and characteristics of biomass direct combustion power generation, biomass gasification power generation, biomass mixed combustion power generation, and biomass biogas power generation in terms of their importance and application in China. Under the perspective of environmental and economic sustainability, the life cycle assessment (LCA) method and dynamic analysis method based on time value are used to simulate and evaluate the environmental loads and economic benefits of different power generation processes. By comparing with coal-fired power generation systems, the environmental and economic benefits of different biomass power generation technologies are illustrated. The results shows that biomass gasification power generation has the best environmental benefits, with a total load of 1.05 x 10(-5), followed by biomass biogas power generation (9.21 x 10(-5)), biomass direct combustion power generation (1.23 x 10(-4)), and biomass mixed combustion power generation (3.88 x 10(-4)). Compared with the environmental load of coal-fired power generation, the reduction rate was 97.69%, 79.69%, 72.87%, and 14.56% respectively. According to the analysis of the technical economy evaluation results, when the dynamic pay-back period and IRR (internal rate of return) were used as evaluation indicators, the biomass direct combustion power generation has the best pay-back period (7.71 years) and IRR (19.16%), followed by the biogas power generation, with higher dynamic payback period (12.03 years), and lower IRR (13.49%). For gasification power generation and mixed-combustion power generation, their dynamic payback period is long, and the IRR is low. If net present value (NPV) is selected as the evaluation index, the biogas power generation appears to be the best because its net present value per megawatt is 11.94 million yuan, followed by direct combustion power generation (6.09 million yuan), and the net present value of mixed-combustion power generation and gasification power generation is relatively low. Compared with coal-fired power generation, direct combustion power generation and biogas power generation present significant economic benefits.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Environmental life cycle assessment of biomass conversion using hydrothermal technology: A review
    Hussin, Farihahusnah
    Hazani, Nur Nadira
    Khalil, Munawar
    Aroua, Mohamed Kheireddine
    [J]. FUEL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY, 2023, 246
  • [2] Life Cycle Assessment and Economic Analysis of Sustainable Ammonia Production from Biomass
    Liu, Zhiqiang
    Gu, Zhaohui
    Ma, Kebo
    Yang, Sheng
    Xie, Nan
    [J]. INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH, 2023, 62 (46) : 19752 - 19763
  • [3] A review on energy, environment and economic assessment in remanufacturing based on life cycle assessment method
    Zhang, Xugang
    Zhang, Mingyue
    Zhang, Hua
    Jiang, Zhigang
    Liu, Conghu
    Cai, Wei
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2020, 255
  • [4] Conversion of biomass to biofuels and life cycle assessment: a review
    Osman, Ahmed, I
    Mehta, Neha
    Elgarahy, Ahmed M.
    Al-Hinai, Amer
    Al-Muhtaseb, Ala'a H.
    Rooney, David W.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY LETTERS, 2021, 19 (06) : 4075 - 4118
  • [5] A review on Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Energy Assessment and Life Cycle Carbon Emissions Assessment on buildings
    Chau, C. K.
    Leung, T. M.
    Ng, W. Y.
    [J]. APPLIED ENERGY, 2015, 143 : 395 - 413
  • [6] Conversion of biomass to biofuels and life cycle assessment: a review
    Ahmed I. Osman
    Neha Mehta
    Ahmed M. Elgarahy
    Amer Al-Hinai
    Ala’a H. Al-Muhtaseb
    David W. Rooney
    [J]. Environmental Chemistry Letters, 2021, 19 : 4075 - 4118
  • [7] Life cycle assessment and economic analysis of straw biogasification power generation technology
    Ma, Guojie
    Zhu, Linying
    Zhang, Miaomiao
    Zhao, Xiaoling
    Chang, Chun
    [J]. Nongye Gongcheng Xuebao/Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2022, 38 (24): : 162 - 168
  • [8] Economic and life cycle assessment of an integrated biomass gasification combined cycle system
    Mann, MK
    Spath, PL
    Craig, KR
    [J]. IECEC 96 - PROCEEDINGS OF THE 31ST INTERSOCIETY ENERGY CONVERSION ENGINEERING CONFERENCE, VOLS 1-4, 1996, : 2134 - 2139
  • [9] Techno-economic and life cycle assessment on lignocellulosic biomass thermochemical conversion technologies: A review
    Patel, Madhumita
    Zhang, Xiaolei
    Kumar, Amit
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2016, 53 : 1486 - 1499
  • [10] Biomass Pyrolysis for Biochar or Energy Applications? A Life Cycle Assessment
    Peters, Jens F.
    Iribarren, Diego
    Dufour, Javier
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2015, 49 (08) : 5195 - 5202