首页> 外文期刊>Environments >Lean VOC-Air Mixtures Catalytic Treatment: Cost-Benefit Analysis of Competing Technologies
【24h】

Lean VOC-Air Mixtures Catalytic Treatment: Cost-Benefit Analysis of Competing Technologies

机译:精益的VOC-空气混合物催化处理:竞争技术的成本效益分析

获取原文
       

摘要

Various processing routes are available for the treatment of lean VOC-air mixtures, and a cost-benefit analysis is the tool we propose to identify the most suitable technology. Two systems have been compared in this paper, namely a “traditional” plant, with a catalytic fixed-bed reactor with a heat exchanger for heat recovery purposes, and a “non-traditional” plant, with a catalytic reverse-flow reactor, where regenerative heat recovery may be achieved thanks to the periodical reversal of the flow direction. To be useful for decisions-making, the cost-benefit analysis must be coupled to the reliability, or availability, analysis of the plant. Integrated Dynamic Decision Analysis is used for this purpose as it allows obtaining the full set of possible sequences of events that could result in plant unavailability, and, for each of them, the probability of occurrence is calculated. Benefits are thus expressed in terms of out-of-services times, that have to be minimized, while the costs are expressed in terms of extra-cost for maintenance activities and recovery actions. These variable costs must be considered together with the capital (fixed) cost required for building the plant. Results evidenced the pros and cons of the two plants. The “traditional” plant ensures a higher continuity of services, but also higher operational costs. The reverse-flow reactor-based plant exhibits lower operational costs, but a higher number of protection levels are needed to obtain a similar level of out-of-service. The quantification of risks and benefits allows the stakeholders to deal with a complete picture of the behavior of the plants, fostering a more effective decision-making process. With reference to the case under study and the relevant operational conditions, the regenerative system was demonstrated to be more suitable to treat lean mixtures: in terms of time losses following potential failures the two technologies are comparable (Fixed bed plant: 0.35 h/year and Reverse flow plant: 0.56 h/year), while in terms of operational costs, despite its higher complexity, the regenerative system shows lower costs (1200 €/year).
机译:有多种处理途径可用于处理稀VOC空气混合物,成本效益分析是我们建议的用于确定最合适技术的工具。本文对两种系统进行了比较,即带有催化固定床反应器和热交换器(用于热回收)的“传统”装置和带有催化逆流反应器的“非传统”装置,其中由于流动方向的周期性逆转,可以实现蓄热回收。为了对决策有用,成本效益分析必须与工厂的可靠性或可用性分析相结合。集成动态决策分析用于此目的,因为它可以获取可能导致工厂不可用的事件的完整可能序列集,并为每个事件计算发生概率。因此,收益是以停止服务的时间表示的,必须将其最小化,而成本以维护活动和恢复行动的额外成本表示。必须将这些可变成本与建造工厂所需的资本(固定)成本一起考虑。结果证明了两种植物的优缺点。 “传统”工厂可确保更高的服务连续性,还可以提高运营成本。基于逆流反应器的工厂具有较低的运营成本,但是需要更高数量的保护级别才能获得类似的服务水平。风险和收益的量化使利益相关者能够全面了解工厂的行为,从而促进更有效的决策过程。参照正在研究的案例和相关的运行条件,该再生系统被证明更适合处理稀薄混合物:就潜在故障造成的时间损失而言,两种技术具有可比性(固定床工厂:0.35小时/年逆流装置:0.56小时/年),尽管操作成本较高,但其复杂性较高,但再生系统的成本较低(1200欧元/年)。

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