Greenhouse gas emissions by the Chinese coking industry

• Autorzy: Ge X. , Chang L. , Yuan J. , Ma J. , Su X. , Ji H.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The Chinese coking industry (CCI) is currently facing a great challenge on reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Our study was set up to assess the GHG emission characteristics of 10 representative coke enterprises and analyse the factors of fuel type, production scale, loading method, oven model, loading rate, etc. The research results showed that fuel gas type, oven model, and loading rate had obvious impacts on the carbon emission intensity of coking plants, while the production scale and the loading method had little effects. The carbon emission intensity of the coking plant using mixed fuel gas was much higher than the plant using coke oven gas as fuel. The carbon emission intensity of the 6.0 m coke oven was 0.7 times higher than that of the 4.3 m coke oven. And the emission intensity of the clean heat recovery coke oven was the highest. An infrequent low loading rate would increase the direct carbon emission intensity signifi cantly. The research results will help the government to compare the emission intensity of the coking industry and make policies about carbon emission intensity reduction.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
• Rocznik: 2016
• Tom: 25
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: p.593-598,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Ge X.

• College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030024, PR China
• Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences in Shanxi, Taiyuan 030009, PR China

autor

Chang L.

• College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030024, PR China

autor

Yuan J.

• Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences in Shanxi, Taiyuan 030009, PR China

autor

Ma J.

• College of Mining Engineering, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030024, PR China

autor

Su X.

• Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences in Shanxi, Taiyuan 030009, PR China

autor

Ji H.

• Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences in Shanxi, Taiyuan 030009, PR China

Bibliografia

• 1. LI H., MU H., ZHANG M., GUI S. Analysis of regional difference on impact factors of China's energy - Related CO2 emissions. Energy. 39 (1), 319, 2012.
• 2. LI A., LIN B. Comparing climate policies to reduce carbon emission intensitys in China. Energy Policy. 60, 667, 2013.
• 3. GUO Z., ZHANG X., ZHENG Y., RAO R. Exploring the impacts of a carbon tax on the Chinese economy using a CGE model with a detailed disaggregation of energy sectors. Energy Economics. 45, 455, 2014.
• 4. HUO H., LEI Y., ZHANG Q., ZHAO L., HE K. China's coke industry: Recent policies, technology shift, and implication for energy and the environment. Energy Policy. 51, 397, 2012.
• 5. WANG H., WANG Y., WANG H., LIU M., ZHANG Y., ZHANG R., YANG J., BI J. Mitigating greenhouse gas emissions from China's cities: Case study of Suzhou. Energy Policy. 68, 482, 2014.
• 6. LU C., TONG Q., LIU X. The impacts of carbon tax and complementary policies on Chinese economy. Energy Policy. 38 (11), 7278, 2010.
• 7. ZHANG X., WANG K., HAO Y., FAN J.L., WEI Y.M. The impact of government policy on preference for NEVs: The evidence from China. Energy Policy. 61, 382, 2013.
• 8. ZHANG N., KONG F., CHOI Y., ZHOU P. The effect of size-control policy on unified energy and carbon efficiency for Chinese fossil fuel power plants. Energy Policy. 70, 193, 2014.
• 9. LIU L., ZONG H., ZHAO E., CHEN C., WANG J. Can China realize its carbon emission intensity reduction goal in 2020: From the perspective of thermal power development. Applied Energy. 124, 199, 2014.
• 10. HU Y., MONROY C.R. Chinese energy and climate policies after Durban: Save the Kyoto Protocol. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 16 (5), 3243, 2012.
• 11. JIANG P., CHEN Y., GENG Y., DONG W., XUE B., XU B., LI W. Analysis of the co-benefits of climate change mitigation and air pollution reduction in China. Journal of Cleaner Production. 58, 130, 2013.
• 12. CAGIAO J., GÓMEZ B., DOMÉNECH J.L., MAINAR S.G., LANZA H.G. Calculation of the corporate carbon footprint of the cement industry by the application of MC3 methodology. Ecological Indicators. 11 (6), 1526, 2011.
• 13. HAQUE N., NORGATE T. Estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from ferroalloy production using life cycle assessment with particular reference to Australia. Journal of Cleaner Production. 39, 220, 2013.
• 14. TURDERA M.V. Energy balance, forecasting of bioelectricity generation and greenhouse gas emission balance in the ethanol production at sugarcane mills in the state of Mato Grosso do Sul. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 19, 582, 2013.
• 15. VAINIKKA P., TSUPARI E., SIPILÄ K., HUPA M. Comparing the greenhouse gas emissions from three alternative waste combustion concepts. Waste Management. 32 (3), 426, 2012.
• 16. ROY P., ORIKASA T., THAMMAWONG M., NAKAMURA N., XU Q. Life cycle of meats: An opportunity to abate the greenhouse gas emission from meat industry in Japan. Journal of Environmental Management. 93 (1), 218, 2012.
• 17. LEE S. Existing and anticipated technology strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Korea's petrochemical and steel industries. Journal of Cleaner Production. 40, 83, 2013.
• 18. LE L.T., IERLAND E.C.V., ZHU X., WESSELER J. Energy and greenhouse gas balances of cassava-based ethanol. Biomass and Bioenergy. 51, 125, 2013.
• 19. TSIROPOULOS I., COK B., PATEL M.K. Energy and greenhouse gas assessment of European glucose production from corn - a multiple allocation approach for a key ingredient of the bio-based economy. Journal of Cleaner Production. 43, 182, 2013.
• 20. CVETINOVIĆ D., STEFANOVIĆ P., MARKOVIĆ Z., BAKIĆ V., TURANJANIN V. GHG (Greenhouse Gases) emission inventory and mitigation measures for public district heating plants in the Republic of Serbia. Energy. 57, 788, 2013.
• 21. ZHANG X., YAN S., TYAGI R.D., SURAMPALLA R.Y Energy balance and greenhouse gas emissions of biodiesel production from oil derived from wastewater and wastewater sludge. Renewable Energy. 55, 392, 2013.
• 22. DORWARD L.J. Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? A comment. Food Policy. 37 (4), 463, 2012.
• 23. KAEWMAI R., H-KITTIKUN A., MUSIKAVONG C. Greenhouse gas emissions of palm oil mills in Thailand. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control. 11, 141, 2012.
• 24. QUINTEIRO P., ARAUJO A., DIAS A.C., OLIVEIRA B., ARROJA L. Allocation of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in the production of earthenware ceramic pieces. Journal of Cleaner Production. 31, 14, 2012.
• 25. JEON E., MYEONG S., SA L.W., KIM J., JEONG J.H. Greenhouse gas emission factor development for coal-fired power plants in Korea. Applied Energy. 87 (1), 205, 2010.
• 26. CHEN G.Q., YANG Q., ZHAO Y.H., WANG Z.F. Nonrenewable energy cost and greenhouse gas emissions of a 1.5MW solar power tower plant in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 15 (4), 1961, 2011.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15244/pjoes/61065