An evaluation of greenhouse gas mitigation options for coal-fired power plants in the US Great Lakes States

被引:38
|
作者
Froese, Robert E. [1 ]
Shonnard, David R. [2 ]
Miller, Chris A. [1 ]
Koers, Ken P. [2 ]
Johnson, Dana M. [3 ]
机构
[1] Michigan Technol Univ, Sch Forest Resources & Environm Sci, Houghton, MI 49931 USA
[2] Michigan Technol Univ, Dept Chem Engn, Houghton, MI 49931 USA
[3] Michigan Technol Univ, Sch Business & Econ, Houghton, MI 49931 USA
来源
BIOMASS & BIOENERGY | 2010年 / 34卷 / 03期
关键词
Biomass; Co-firing; Coal; Energy crops; Great Lakes States; Greenhouse gas mitigation; Life Cycle Assessment; Sequestration; UNITED-STATES; SEQUESTRATION; ENERGY; SOIL; DIVERSITY; CROPS; LAND; CO2;
D O I
10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.10.013
中图分类号
S2 [农业工程];
学科分类号
0828 ;
摘要
We assessed options for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation in the US Great Lakes States, a region heavily dependent on coal-fired power plants. A proposed 600 MW power plant in northern Lower Michigan, USA provided context for our evaluation. Options to offset fossil CO2 emissions by 20% included biomass fuel substitution from (1) forest residuals, (2) short-rotation woody crops, or (3) switchgrass; (4) biologic sequestration in forest plantations; and (5) geologic sequestration using CO2 capture. Review of timber product output data, land cover data, and expected energy crop productivity on idle agriculture land within 120 km of the plant revealed that biomass from forestry residuals has the potential to offset 6% and from energy crops 27% of the annual fossil fuel requirement. Furthermore, annual forest harvest in the region is only 26% of growth and the surplus represents a large opportunity for forest products and bioenergy applications. We used Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to compare mitigation options, using fossil energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions per unit electricity generation as criteria. LCA results revealed that co-firing with forestry residuals is the most attractive option and geologic sequestration is the least attractive option, based on the two criteria. Biologic sequestration is intermediate but likely infeasible because of very large land area requirements. Our study revealed that biomass feedstock potentials from land and forest resources are not limiting mitigation activities, but the most practical approach is likely a combination of options that optimize additional social, environmental and economic criteria. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:251 / 262
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Evaluation of CO2 mitigation retrofit options for low-quality coal fired power plants
    Kakaras, E
    Doukelis, A
    Giannakopoulos, D
    Koumanakos, A
    Hatzilau, C
    [J]. Proceedings of ECOS 2005, Vols 1-3: SHAPING OUR FUTURE ENERGY SYSTEMS, 2005, : 717 - 723
  • [42] Review of transition paths for coal-fired power plants
    Fulong Song
    Hasan Mehedi
    Caihao Liang
    Jing Meng
    Zhengxi Chen
    Fang Shi
    [J]. Global Energy Interconnection, 2021, 4 (04) : 354 - 370
  • [43] Solar Steam Boosters for Coal-fired Power Plants
    Venetos, Milton
    Conlon, William
    [J]. POWER ENGINEERING, 2010, 114 (11) : 178 - +
  • [44] Alberta mercury regulation for coal-fired power plants
    Valupadas, Prasad
    [J]. FUEL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY, 2009, 90 (11) : 1339 - 1342
  • [45] Review of transition paths for coal-fired power plants
    Song, Fulong
    Mehedi, Hasan
    Liang, Caihao
    Meng, Jing
    Chen, Zhengxi
    Shi, Fang
    [J]. GLOBAL ENERGY INTERCONNECTION-CHINA, 2021, 4 (04): : 354 - 370
  • [46] Mercury Removal Characteristics of Coal-Fired Power Plants
    Yang Liguo
    Fan Xiaoxu
    DuanYufeng
    Wang Yunjun
    [J]. 2013 THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INTELLIGENT SYSTEM DESIGN AND ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS (ISDEA), 2013, : 930 - 933
  • [47] Mercury Partitioning in Coal-fired Power Plants in Japan
    Noda, Naoki
    Ito, Shigeo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE JAPAN INSTITUTE OF ENERGY, 2018, 97 (11) : 342 - 347
  • [48] Nonlinear control of coal-fired steam power plants
    Alamoodi, Nahla
    Daoutidis, Prodromos
    [J]. CONTROL ENGINEERING PRACTICE, 2017, 60 : 63 - 75
  • [49] Mercury policy and regulations for coal-fired power plants
    Rallo, Manuela
    Lopez-Anton, M. Antonia
    Contreras, M. Luisa
    Maroto-Valer, M. Mercedes
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2012, 19 (04) : 1084 - 1096
  • [50] Architecture and design of smart coal-fired power plants
    Bao, Xiding
    Mao, Xiangyun
    Liu, Xinfcng
    Chcn, Hao
    Wang, Zhcnkc
    Zheng, Xiaoyong
    [J]. 2022 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CYBORG AND BIONIC SYSTEMS, CBS, 2022, : 419 - 423