Exergy accounting: a quantitative comparison of methods and implications for energy-economy analysis
Exergy accounting: a quantitative comparison of methods and implications for energy-economy analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.3390/en9110947
复制
发表时间：
2016-11
期刊：
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Jack Miller;T. Foxon;S. Sorrell
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jack Miller;T. Foxon;S. Sorrell
对能源消费与经济增长脱钩的可行性评估，可能受益于对不同能源流的规模、性质和价值的更好理解。通过关注所谓的“有用能”，这种理解可能会得到加强。“有用能”是能量转换链中“有用”阶段能量的数量和“质量”（这里定义为其进行物理功的热力学能力）的度量。各国经济中有用的能源流动正日益被量化，并探讨它们在经济活动中的作用。然而，这个所谓的“能源经济学”领域目前缺乏一致的方法论。本文有助于开发一种更一致的方法。通过构建一个涵盖1960-2012年期间的英国“有用能源账户”，我们探讨了不同的方法选择如何影响对不同类别最终用途的有用能源的估计以及对全国有用能源消耗总量的估计。具体而言，我们评估了估计的敏感性：(a)估计不同最终用途的能源效率的方法；(b)最终用途类别之间的界限；(c)与可再生电力相关的一次用能估算方法。我们还改进了目前计算工业用热的方法。这导致在构建有用的能源账户时提出最佳实践建议，并确定需要进一步发展方法的领域。
Assessments of the feasibility of decoupling energy consumption from economic growth could benefit from an improved understanding of the size, nature and value of different energy flows. This understanding may be enhanced by focusing upon so-called “useful exergy”—a measure of both the quantity and “quality” of energy (defined here as its thermodynamic ability to perform physical work) at the “useful” stage of the energy conversion chain. Useful exergy flows within national economies are increasingly being quantified and their role in economic activity explored. However, this so-called “exergy economics” field currently lacks a consistent methodology. This paper contributes to the development of a more consistent approach. By constructing a “useful exergy account” for the United Kingdom covering the period 1960–2012, we explore how different methodological choices influence estimates of useful exergy for different categories of end-use as well as estimates of total national useful exergy consumption. Specifically, we evaluate the sensitivity of estimates to: (a) the method of estimating the exergy efficiency of different end-uses; (b) the boundaries between end-use categories; and (c) the method of estimating the primary exergy associated with renewable electricity. We also improve upon the current method of accounting for industrial uses of heat. This leads to suggestions for best practice when constructing useful exergy accounts, and the identification of areas where further methodological development is required.