首页> 外文期刊>Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews >Life cycle assessment of energy generation from biogas-Attributional vs.consequential approach
【24h】

Life cycle assessment of energy generation from biogas-Attributional vs.consequential approach

机译:沼气发电生命周期评估-属性法与结果法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Many studies that apply life cycle assessment methodology avoid a strict differentiation between attributional (aLCA) and consequential (cLCA) life cycle assessment. The main distinction that can be made is that an aLCA approach describes a state of average production systems of an economic system while in contrast the consequential approach describes changes (induced by political decisions) in production systems within the economic system. The task of this study was to analyze a biogas system from an environmental point of view and thereby to work out the methodological differences of aLCA and cLCA approaches. The Life cycle inventory quantity primary energy demand (PED) as well as the impact categories global warming potential (GWP), eutrophication (EP), acidification (AP) and photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP) were analyzed. The aLCA approach was split into three scenarios, a physical, an economic and a core product focused one (with focus on the main product) to show the impact of by-product handling. The cLCA approach was split into a local scenario using on-site data and a general scenario using higher aggregated data to show the effects of substitution caused by the introduction of a new technology. The results of the two approaches were compared with the environmental impact of the current average and marginal German electricity mix. Global warming potential per functional unit varied between 3.8 g and 12.5 g of C02 equivalent in the biogas scenarios. Compared to the average and marginal German electricity mix savings in PED, GWP and partly in AP and POCP can be achieved. However, high variations in the proportion to the reference electricity system, the total quantity results as well as the contribution of single processes to the total result were found. This makes it indispensable to distinguish accurately between the aLCA and the cLCA approach.
机译:许多应用生命周期评估方法的研究都避免了归因(aLCA)和结果(cLCA)生命周期评估之间的严格区分。可以做出的主要区别是,aLCA方法描述了经济系统的平均生产系统的状态,相反,结果方法描述了经济系统内生产系统的变化(由政治决策引起)。这项研究的任务是从环境的角度分析沼气系统,从而找出aLCA和cLCA方法的方法学差异。分析了生命周期库存数量一次能源需求(PED)以及影响类别全球变暖潜势(GWP),富营养化(EP),酸化(AP)和光化学臭氧产生潜能(POCP)。 aLCA方法分为三种方案,以物理,经济和核心产品为重点(重点放在主要产品),以显示副产品处理的影响。 cLCA方法被分为使用现场数据的本地方案和使用更高汇总数据的一般方案,以显示由于引入新技术而产生的替代效果。将这两种方法的结果与当前平均水平和德国边缘电力组合对环境的影响进行了比较。在沼气情景中,每个功能单元的全球变暖潜能在3.8 g至12.5 g CO2当量之间变化。与PED,GWP以及部分AP和POCP中的德国平均和边际电力混合相比,可以实现节省。但是,发现与参考电力系统的比例,总量结果以及单个过程对总量的贡献很大。这使得准确区分aLCA和cLCA方法变得必不可少。

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