Parametric life cycle assessment for distributed combined cooling, heating and power integrated with solar energy and energy storage
Parametric life cycle assessment for distributed combined cooling, heating and power integrated with solar energy and energy storage
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119483
复制
发表时间：
2020-03
影响因子：
11.1
通讯作者：
Junchen Yan;Osvaldo A. Broesicke;Dong Wang;Duo Li;J. Crittenden
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Junchen Yan;Osvaldo A. Broesicke;Dong Wang;Duo Li;J. Crittenden
在本研究中，我们开发了一个参数生命周期评估框架，并评估了与可再生能源和储能系统（CCHP-RE-ESS）集成的分布式冷、热、电联合系统的环境和经济权衡。此外，我们将其与集中式传统能源发电进行比较。CCHP-RE-ESS系统由微型涡轮机、太阳能光伏、锂离子电池和其他辅助系统组件组成。使用参数生命周期评估方法，我们学习了各种尺寸的太阳能光伏电池阵列和电池的环境和经济影响的权衡。由于采用了基于小时的仿真和不同系统部件的参数化模型，参数化生命周期评价的排放影响结果比传统的生命周期评价更为准确。我们的模拟表明，与我们研究的大多数建筑类型和气候区域的集中式传统能源生产相比，遵循热负荷的拟议系统可以主要减少整体环境影响。例如，该系统可以帮助亚特兰大的一家中型办公室减少46%的全球变暖影响，98%的用水量，93%的酸化影响等。在成本方面，拟议系统的生命周期成本往往高于传统的能源生产，而小型和大型办公室比中型办公室更经济。
In this research, we develop a parametric life cycle assessment framework and evaluate the environmental and economic trade-offs of a distributed combined cooling, heating, and power system integrated with renewable energy and energy storage system (CCHP-RE-ESS). Also, we compare this to centralized conventional energy generation. The CCHP-RE-ESS system consists of microturbines, solar PVs, lithium-ion batteries, and other auxiliary system components. Using a parametric life cycle assessment approach, we learn the trade-offs environmental and economic impacts for various sizes of solar PVs arrays and batteries. The emission impact result from the parametric life cycle assessment is more accurate than the conventional life cycle assessment due to hourly-based simulation and parametric models for different system components. Our simulations show that the proposed system that follows the thermal load can primarily reduce the overall environmental impact as compared to the centralized conventional energy production for most building types and climate zones we studied. For example, the system can help a medium office in Atlanta reduce 46% of global warming impact, 98% of water usage, 93% of acidification impact, etc. In terms of cost, the life cycle cost of the proposed system is often higher than conventional energy generation while it is more economical for the small and large office than the medium office.