Renew, reduce or become more efficient? The climate contribution of biomass co-combustion in a coal-fired power plant
Renew, reduce or become more efficient? The climate contribution of biomass co-combustion in a coal-fired power plant
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.11.033
复制
发表时间：
2017-02
期刊：
影响因子：
11.2
通讯作者：
J. Miedema;R. Benders;H. Moll;Frank Pierie
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Miedema;R. Benders;H. Moll;Frank Pierie
在本文中，生物质供应链，与不同份额的生物质共燃燃煤电厂，能源效率，能源消耗，可再生能源生产和温室气体（GHG）排放量进行了分析，并与100%的煤炭供应链的情况下，荷兰的情况下的性能进行了比较。60%的生物质共燃供应链情景显示了减少排放高达48%的可能性。低共燃水平对减少温室气体排放是有效的，但幅度很小。目前，颗粒的共燃烧是常态。联合烘焙和造粒（TOP）的共燃显示出最好的结果，但也是最具投机性的。可再生能源指令的指标无法对齐。当生物质被认为稀缺时，从能源角度看，混合燃烧少量或不混合燃烧是最佳选择。当生物量被认为是丰富的，从减少温室气体的角度来看，大部分的混合燃烧是最好的选择。
Within this paper, biomass supply chains, with different shares of biomass co-combustion in coal fired power plants, are analysed on energy efficiency, energy consumption, renewable energy production, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and compared with the performance of a 100% coal supply chain scenario, for a Dutch situation. The 60% biomass co-combustion supply chain scenarios show possibilities to reduce emissions up to 48%. The low co-combustion levels are effective to reduce GHG emissions, but the margins are small. Currently co-combustion of pellets is the norm. Co-combustion of combined torrefaction and pelleting (TOP) shows the best results, but is also the most speculative.The indicators from the renewable energy directive cannot be aligned. When biomass is regarded as scarce, co-combustion of small shares or no co-combustion is the best option from an energy perspective. When biomass is regarded as abundant, co-combustion of large shares is the best option from a GHG reduction perspective.