首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Cleaner Production >Comparative Life Cycle Assessment Of Four Alternatives For Using By-products Of Cane Sugar Production
【24h】

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment Of Four Alternatives For Using By-products Of Cane Sugar Production

机译:蔗糖生产副产品使用四种替代品的比较生命周期评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Cane sugar production by-products can be considered either as waste, affecting the environment, or as a resource when an appropriate valorization technology is implemented. This study is made with the objective of identifying and quantifying the aspects which have the largest environmental impact of four alternatives for using by-products and wastes from the cane sugar process and suggest improvements in the systems. For this analysis a cane sugar mill was chosen in Cuba and four alternatives were designed for the byproduct valorization. The first alternative represents the conventional sugar production; its main characteristics are the use of synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, the bagasse combustion and the usage of molasses and agricultural wastes as animal food. Other wastes constitute emissions to the environment. Alternatives II, III and IV incorporate more use of by-products and wastes. Alternative II considers the use of wastewater, filter cake and ashes for the substitution of synthetic fertilizers. In Alternative III, the filter cake and wastewater are used for biogas production and Alternative IV integrates alcohol and biogas production into the sugar production process. The assessment is done by means of Life Cycle Assessment, according to the ISO 14040 series by using the SimaPro 6.0 LCA software, Ecoinvent database and the Eco-indicator 99 methodology. As a functional unit the daily sugar production of the mill was defined (216 t/d). The sugar was selected as main product and all the by-products were assumed to substitute other products on the market, avoided products. For the four alternatives, the agricultural stage shows the greatest impact due to land use, fuel and agrochemicals consumption. In the industrial stage, the electricity cogeneration with bagasse has the highest impact as to respiratory effects due to the emission of tiny particle material into the atmosphere. The major difference between the alternatives is found in the resource impact category. The advantage of producing alcohol, biogas, animal food and fertilizers from the by-products is made obvious through the comparative study for resource savings.
机译:实施适当的增值技术后,可以将蔗糖生产副产品视为浪费,影响环境,或者视为资源。进行这项研究的目的是识别和量化使用蔗糖工艺副产物和废料的四种替代方法对环境影响最大的方面,并提出系统改进建议。为了进行此分析,在古巴选择了一家蔗糖厂,并设计了四种替代品来进行副产品评估。第一种选择代表常规的糖生产;它的主要特征是使用合成肥料,农药,甘蔗渣燃烧以及将糖蜜和农业废料用作动物性食品。其他废物构成对环境的排放。备选方案II,III和IV包含更多副产品和废物的使用。备选方案二考虑使用废水,滤饼和灰烬替代合成肥料。在替代方案III中,滤饼和废水用于沼气生产,替代方案IV将酒精和沼气生产整合到制糖过程中。评估是通过生命周期评估,根据ISO 14040系列,使用SimaPro 6.0 LCA软件,Ecoinvent数据库和Eco-indicator 99方法进行的。作为功​​能单位,工厂的日糖产量定义为(216吨/天)。选择了糖作为主要产品,所有副产品均被认为可以替代市场上的其他产品,避免使用产品。对于这四个替代方案,由于土地使用,燃料和农药消耗,农业阶段的影响最大。在工业阶段,与甘蔗渣热电联产对呼吸系统的影响最大,这是由于向大气中排放了微小的颗粒物质。替代方案之间的主要区别在于资源影响类别。通过对资源节约的比较研究,可以明显看出由副产物生产酒精,沼气,动物食品和化肥的优势。

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