Unstandardized LCA-Based Technology Sustainability Assessment for Alternative Energy Scenarios for Cogeneration System

• Autorzy: Kluczek A.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/mape-2018-0099

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In pursuit of higher energy savings and de-carbonization, greater fuel diversity and lower pollutant emission is possible by production processes through energy-savings opportunities and associated environmentally-benign technologies. Current production processes represents the biggest consumption of energy, and the greatest amount of emissions emitted to the environment. Improvement in energy efficiency is considered as the basic principle in realizing energy-saving, bringing cost-effective benefits and reduction of greenhouse emissions. Hence, this study proposes a framework to assess alternative sustainability of cogeneration systems, integrating the economic, environmental, and social indicators. The results showed that the cogeneration system with a new boiler with a 600 PSIG pressure and a new turbine seems to be a cost-efficient solution compared to the baseline scenario saving energy at the level of 1,823,072 kWh/yr (63%) against the baseline scenario. In the case study, the implemented solution in the plant improved the overall sustainability degree of technology by 53% (from 46% as baseline to 97%).

Słowa kluczowe

EN

LCA; technology assessment; assessment criteria; energy efficiency; cogeneration system

• Wydawca: STE GROUP ; De Gruyter
• Czasopismo: Multidisciplinary Aspects of Production Engineering
• Rocznik: 2018
• Tom: Vol. 1, Iss. 1
• Strony: 785--791
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 11 poz., fig., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Kluczek A.

• Warsaw University of Technology, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Armina, E. and Vilsi, A. L. (2015). Key Performance Indicators for Sustainable Manufacturing Evaluation in Cement Industry. Procedia CIRP, 26, pp. 19-25.
• 2. De Benedetto, L., Klemes, J. (2009). The Environmental Performance Strategy Map: an integrated LCA approach to support the strategic decision-making process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17, pp. 900–906.
• 3. Da Silva, P. R. S. and Amaral, F. G. (2009). An integrated methodology for environmental impacts and costs evaluation in industrial processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(15), pp. 1339-1350.
• 4. DOE, (2018). Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE). [online] Available at: https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/08/f25/LCOE.pdf/ [Accessed 23 Apr. 2018].
• 5. Kluczek, A. (2018). Dynamic energy LCA-based assessment approach to evaluate energy intensity and related impact for the biogas CHP plant as the basis of the environmental view of sustainability. Procedia Manufacturing.
• 6. Lindberg, C., Tan, S. T.; Yan, J. Y. and Starfelt, F. (2015). Key performance indicators improve industrial performance. Energy Procedia, 75, pp. 1785-1790.
• 7. Lucato, W.C. (2018). Measuring the sustainability of a manufacturing process: A conceptual framework. Sustainability, 10(1), pp. 81.
• 8. Ness, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S. and Olsson, L. (2007). Categorizing tools for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics, 60(3), pp. 498-508.
• 9. Ryan, M. (2015). Geometry for Dummies. New York, NY: For Dummies Book.
• 10. Santoyo-Castelazo, E. and Azapagic, A. (2014). Sustainability assessment of energy systems: integrating environmental, economic and social aspects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 80, pp. 119-138.
• 11. Skowrońska, M. and Filipek, T. (2014). Life cycle assessment of fertilizer: review. International Agrophysics, 28, pp. 101-110.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021).