Life cycle energy comparison of different polymer recycling processes

Life cycle energy comparison of different polymer recycling processes
复制标题

不同聚合物回收工艺的生命周期能耗比较

DOI:
10.1002/amp2.10034
复制
发表时间:
2019
期刊:
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing and Processing
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Griffing, Evan M.
Griffing, Evan M.
中科院分区:
--
文献类型:
--
作者:
Overcash, Michael R.;Ewell, James H.;Griffing, Evan M.

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

这篇文章旨在展示一种一致、透明的方法来比较塑料回收技术。统一的比较是基于每种回收技术具有相同的投入(废PET)、用于加工的质量基础、作为新产品(新的PET产品或燃料)的输出以及相同的多个(两个)闭合循环的概念。我们试图在基本技术层面上展示能源使用如何区分塑料回收技术。通过对1 千克聚酯瓶(大约100个单次使用的0.5 L水瓶)进行统一的定量比较,研究了五种聚合物回收工艺:直接回收、100%机械回收、新树脂的解聚和再聚合以及100%回收瓶子、回收能量值和填埋。具有不同产品回收含量的回收技术的生命周期能量效益可由单一方程确定。与垃圾填埋相比,所有这些回收过程都降低了每公斤PET瓶的总能量。以每1公斤PET瓶三个循环的基本情况为例,探讨循环循环的影响。直接重复使用三次循环后,能量提高了290%。其他工艺,都是100%回收含量,给出了改进:机械(250%)、解聚/再聚合(150%)和能量回收(120%)。更多的信息将改善对解聚过程评估的分析。这些初步数据描述了量化使用这些回收方法回收任何聚合物的益处所需的分析。环境基因组(“EGI”)为这些计算提供了有价值的信息,因为它包含了用于此类评估的聚合物和供应链。
This article is to demonstrate a consistent, transparent approach to comparing plastic recycling technologies. The uniform comparison is based on each recycling technology having the same input (waste PET), mass basis for processing, output as new product (new PET product or fuels), and the concept of the same multiple (two) closed loops of recycling. We seek to demonstrate, at the fundamental technology level, how energy use differentiates plastic recycling technologies. Five polymer‐recycling processes are examined using a uniform, quantitative comparison of 1 kg PET bottles (about 100 single‐serve 0.5 L water bottles): direct reuse, 100% mechanical recycled content, depolymerization, and re‐polymerization of new resin and 100% to bottles, reclaiming energy value, and landfill. The life cycle energy benefit for recycle technologies with varying product recycled content can be determined by a single equation. All these recycling processes resulted in total energy reduction per kg PET bottles compared to landfilling. The base case of three cycles per 1 kg PET bottles is used to explore the influence of recycling loops. Direct reuse gave a 290% energy improvement with three cycles. Other processes, all at 100% recycle content, gave improvements: mechanical (250%), depolymerization/repolymerization (150%), and energy recovery (120%). More information would improve the analysis of the depolymerization process assessment. These preliminary data describe the analyses that are needed to quantify the benefit of recycling any polymer using these recycling methods. The Environmental Genome (“EGI”) provides valuable information for these calculations as it contains the polymers and supply chains for such evaluations.
DOI: 10.1109/isee.2006.1650060
发表时间: 2006-05
期刊: Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, 2006.
影响因子: --
作者:
A. Thiriez;T. Gutowski
通讯作者: A. Thiriez;T. Gutowski
美国能源强度指标综合系统:方法、数据和主要趋势
DOI: --
发表时间: 2020
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
D. Belzer
通讯作者: D. Belzer
工业产品环境基因组(EGIP):人类健康缺失的一环
DOI: --
发表时间: 2016
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
M. Overcash
通讯作者: M. Overcash
地毯染色工艺的生命周期比较
DOI: 10.1002/amp2.10012
发表时间: 2019
期刊: Journal of Advanced Manufacturing and Processing
影响因子: --
作者:
Ponder, Celia;Gregory, Bill;Griffing, Evan;Li, Yong;Overcash, Michael
通讯作者: Overcash, Michael