首页> 外文期刊>Applied Energy >Assessing the economic efficiency of bioenergy technologies in climate mitigation and fossil fuel replacement in Austria using a techno-economic approach
【24h】

Assessing the economic efficiency of bioenergy technologies in climate mitigation and fossil fuel replacement in Austria using a techno-economic approach

机译:使用技术经济方法评估奥地利在缓解气候变化和化石燃料替代方面的生物能源技术的经济效率

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

The core issues of the Austrian energy policy agenda include reducing greenhouse gas (GHC) emissions and dependence on fossil fuels. Within this study, the costs of CHG mitigation and fossil fuel replacement (abatement costs) of established and upcoming bioenergy technologies for heat, electricity and transport fuel production are assessed. Sensitivity analyses and projections up to 2030 illustrate the effect of dynamic parameters on specific abatement costs.The results show that the abatement costs of wood-based heat generation technologies substituting oil-fired boilers and gas-fired heating plants, respectively, are in the range of -45 € per ton CO_2-equiva-lent (€/t CO_2-eq.) and -11 € per MWh higher heating value (€/MWh_(HHv)) to 93€/t CO_2-eq. and 24 €/ MW h_(HHv)- Heating systems around 50 kW show the lowest abatement costs. For combined heat and power (CHP) plants, two different cases with regard to heat utilization are assumed. In an optimal mode (100% of generated heat displaces fossil fuel-based heat production), abatement costs of wood-based technologies, substituting electricity from modern combined cycle gas turbines, range from 5 €/t CO_2-eq. and 1 €/MW h_(HHv) to 201 €/t CO_2-eq. and 38 e/MW h_(HHv). Representative values of typical CHP plants with a capacity of 1 MW_e, and more are in the magnitude of 50 €/t CO_2-eq. and 10 €/MW h_(HHv)- Under less favorable conditions (3000 heat full load hours per year), abatement costs of typical plants are around 100€/t CO_2-eq. and 17 €/MWh_(HHv) higher. The costs of CHG mitigation and fossil fuel saving with established transport fuels (biodiesel and ethanol) range from 71 €/t CO_2-eq. and 8 €/MW h_(HHv) to 200 €/t CO_2-eq. and 82 e/MW h_(HHv)- For liquid fuels from lignocellulosis, abatement costs are estimated 147 €/t CO_2-eq. and 38 €/MWh_(HHv) to 240 €/t CO_2-eq. and 59 €/MWh_(HHv). The abatement costs of synthetic natural gas are found to be significantly lower: 75 e/t CO_2-eq. and 14 €/MWh_(HHv) to 128 e/t CO_2-eq. and 23 e/MW h_(HHv)- The results suggest that heat generation and - given favorable conditions - CHP generation are the most cost-efficient options for reducing GHG emissions and fossil fuel dependence in Austria. A core advantage of CHP is higher quantities of abatement per unit of biomass used. In contrast, this is found to be the main drawback of synthetic transport fuels from wood.
机译:奥地利能源政策议程的核心问题包括减少温室气体(GHC)排放以及对化石燃料的依赖。在这项研究中,评估了已建立的和即将到来的用于热,电和运输燃料生产的生物能源技术的CHG减排成本和化石燃料替代成本(减排成本)。直到2030年的敏感性分析和预测都可以说明动态参数对特定减排成本的影响,结果表明,分别取代燃油锅炉和燃气供热厂的木质热发电技术的减排成本在每吨CO_2当量-45欧元(€/ t CO_2当量)和每MWh高发热量-11欧元(€/ MWh_(HHv))至93€/ t CO_2当量。和24欧元/兆瓦时的h_(HHv)-50千瓦左右的加热系统显示出最低的减排成本。对于热电联产(CHP)电厂,假设有两种不同的热利用情况。在最佳模式下(产生的热量的100%替代了以化石燃料为基础的热量生产),用木质技术替代现代联合循环燃气轮机发电的减排成本为5欧元/吨CO_2-eq。和1€/ MW h_(HHv)至201€/ t CO_2eq。和38 e / MW h_(HHv)。容量为1 MW_e或更高的典型热电联产电厂的代表价值为50€/ t CO_2-eq。和10€/ MW h_(HHv)-在不利条件下(每年3000热量满负荷小时),典型电厂的减排成本约为100€/ t CO_2-eq。和更高的€17 / MWh_(HHv)。既定的运输燃料(生物柴油和乙醇)减少CHG和节省化石燃料的成本为71欧元/吨CO_2当量。 8€/ MW h_(HHv)至200€/ t CO_2-eq。和82 e / MW h_(HHv)-对于来自木质纤维素的液体燃料,减排成本估计为147€/ t CO_2-eq。 38€/ MWh_(HHv)至240€/ t CO_2当量。 59€/ MWh_(HHv)。发现合成天然气的减排成本要低得多:75 e / t CO_2-eq。 14€/ MWh_(HHv)至128 e / t CO_2当量。和23 e / MW h_(HHv)-结果表明,在奥地利,热量产生和-在有利条件下-CHP产生是减少温室气体排放和减少对化石燃料依赖的最具成本效益的选择。 CHP的核心优势是每使用一单位生物质可实现更高的减排量。相反,发现这是由木材合成的运输燃料的主要缺点。

著录项

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