首页> 外文学位 >Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions, consumptive water use and levelized costs of unconventional oil in North America.
【24h】

Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions, consumptive water use and levelized costs of unconventional oil in North America.

机译:北美生命周期的温室气体排放量,耗水量和非常规石油的平均成本。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Conventional petroleum production in many countries that supply U.S. crude oil as well as domestic production has declined in recent years. Along with instability in the world oil market, this has stimulated the discussion of developing unconventional oil production, e.g., oil sands and oil shale. Expanding the U.S. energy mix to include oil sands and oil shale may be an important component in diversifying and securing the U.S. energy supply. At the same time, life cycle GHG emissions of these energy sources and consumptive water use are a concern. In this study, consumptive water use includes not only fresh water use but entire consumptive use including brackish water and seawater.;The results of this study suggest that CTL with no carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and current electricity grid mix is the worst while crude oil imported from United Kingdom is the best in GHG emissions. The life cycle GHG emissions of oil shale surface mining, oil shale in-situ process, oil sands surface mining, and oil sands in-situ process are 43% to 62%, 13% to 32%, 5% to 22%, and 11% to 13% higher than those of U.S. domestic crude oil.;Oil shale in-situ process has the largest consumptive water use among alternative fuels, evaluated due to consumptive water use in electricity generation. Life cycle consumptive water use of oil sands in-situ process is the lowest. Specifically, fresh water consumption in the production processes is the most concern given its scarcity. However, disaggregated data on fresh water consumption in the total water consumption of each fuel production process is not available. Given current information, it is inconclusive whether unconventional oil would require more or less consumptive fresh water use than U.S. domestic crude oil production. It depends on the water conservative strategy applied in each process.;Increasing import of SCO derived from Canadian oil sands and U.S. oil shale would slightly increase life cycle GHG emissions of the U.S. petroleum status quo. The expected additional 2 million bpd of Canadian SCO from oil sands and U.S. oil shale would increase life cycle GHG emissions of the U.S. petroleum status quo on average only 10 and 40 kg CO2 equiv/bbl, or about 7.5 and 29 million tons CO2 equiv/year. However this increase represents less than 1 and 5% of U.S. transportation emissions in 2007.;The goal of this study is to determine the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and consumptive water use of synthetic crude oil (SCO) derived from Canadian oil sands and U.S. oil shale to be compared with U.S. domestic crude oil, U.S. imported crude oil, and coal-to-liquid (CTL). Levelized costs of SCO derived from Canadian oil sands and U.S. oil shale were also estimated.;Because U.S. oil shale resources are located in areas experiencing water scarcity, methods to manage the issue were explored. The result also shows that trading water rights between Upper and Lower Colorado River basin and transporting synthetic crude shale oil to refinery elsewhere is the best scenario for life cycle GHG emissions and consumptive water use of U.S. oil shale production. GHG emissions and costs of water supply system contribute only 1-2% of life cycle GHG emissions and 1-6% of total levelized costs.;The levelized costs of using SCO from oil shale as feedstock are greater than SCO from oil sands, and CTL. The levelized costs of producing liquid fuel (gasoline and diesel) using SCO derived from Canadian oil sands as feedstock are approximately ;From an energy security perspective, increasing the use of Canadian oil sands, U.S. oil shale, and CTL may be preferable to increasing Middle East imports. However, oil shale and CTL has the advantage security wise over Canadian oil sands because oil shale and coal are abundant U.S. resources. From a GHG emissions and consumptive water use perspective, CTL requires less consumptive water use than oil shale in-situ process but produces more GHG emissions than oil shale in-situ and surface mining process, unless CTL plant performs CCS and renewable electricity.
机译:近年来,供应美国原油的许多国家的常规石油产量以及国内产量都在下降。随着世界石油市场的不稳定,这激发了关于发展非常规石油生产的讨论,例如,油砂和油页岩。扩大美国的能源结构以包括油砂和油页岩可能是多样化和确保美国能源供应的重要组成部分。同时,这些能源的生命周期温室气体排放和耗水量也值得关注。在这项研究中,消耗性用水不仅包括淡水使用,还包括包括半咸水和海水在内的整个消耗性用水;该研究的结果表明,没有碳捕获和封存(CCS)和当前电网混合的CTL最差,而从英国进口的原油是温室气体排放最好的。油页岩地面开采,原位油页岩开采,油砂地面开采和原位油砂开采的生命周期温室气体排放量分别为43%至62%,13%至32%,5%至22%和比美国国内原油价格高11%至13%。;由于发电中的耗水量,原位油页岩工艺在替代燃料中耗水量最大。原位生产过程中油砂的生命周期耗水量最低。具体而言,生产过程中的淡水消耗由于其稀缺性而最为关注。但是,没有每个燃料生产过程中总耗水量中淡水消耗量的分类数据。根据目前的信息,与美国国内原油产量相比,非常规石油是否需要更多或更少的消耗性淡水使用尚无定论。这取决于在每个过程中采用的节水策略。增加从加拿大油砂和美国油页岩中提取的上海合作组织的进口量会略微增加美国石油现状的生命周期温室气体排放量。预期从油砂和美国油页岩中再增加200万桶/日的加拿大SCO,将平均增加美国石油现状的生命周期温室气体排放量,平均仅10至40千克二氧化碳当量/桶,或约7.5至2900万吨二氧化碳当量/年。但是,这一增长仅占2007年美国运输排放量的不到1%和5%。该研究的目标是确定生命周期温室气体(GHG)排放量和源自加拿大石油的合成原油(SCO)的耗水量砂和美国油页岩将与美国国内原油,美国进口原油和煤制油(CTL)进行比较。还估算了源自加拿大油砂和美国油页岩的SCO的均等成本;由于美国油页岩资源位于缺水地区,因此探索了解决该问题的方法。结果还表明,在上科罗拉多河流域和下科罗拉多河流域之间进行水权交易以及将合成粗页岩油运输到其他地方的炼油厂是生命周期温室气体排放和美国油页岩生产消耗水的最佳方案。温室气体排放量和供水系统成本仅占生命周期温室气体排放量的1-2%,占总平准化成本的1-6%;使用油页岩作为原料的SCO的平准化成本大于油砂的SCO,以及CTL。使用加拿大油砂衍生的SCO作为原料生产液体燃料(汽油和柴油)的平均成本约为;东进口。但是,油页岩和CTL在安全性方面优于加拿大油砂,因为油页岩和煤炭是美国丰富的资源。从温室气体排放和耗水量的角度来看,CTL所需的耗水量比油页岩现场处理要少,但是与油页岩现场开采和地表开采过程相比,CTL产生的温室气体排放量要多,除非CTL工厂执行CCS和可再生电力。

著录项

  • 作者

    Mangmeechai, Aweewan.;

  • 作者单位

    Carnegie Mellon University.;

  • 授予单位 Carnegie Mellon University.;
  • 学科 Engineering Petroleum.;Engineering Environmental.;Energy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2009
  • 页码 120 p.
  • 总页数 120
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号