CLEAN FUEL SYSTEM ANALYSIS USING ZERO EMISSIONS AND EMERGY

APPROACHES

Janis Gravitis, Arnis Janovs & Edward Someus

e-mail: jgravit@edi.lv

INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUMMoving Towards Zero Emission Plants

Greece, June 29 - 22, 2005

Zero Emissions ConcptThe ZERI (Zero Emissions Research Initiative, 1994, the Institute of

Advanced Studies, United Nations University), as a scientific international program emphasizes a shift from the traditional linear

industrial model in which wastes are considered the norm, to integrated systems in which everything has its use. It advocates an industrial

transformation whereby businesses emulate the sustainable cycles found in nature, and, where society minimizes the load, it imposes on the

natural resource base and learns to do more with what the earth produces. In this way, industries are reorganized into clusters such that each

industry's wastes/by-products are fully matched with the input requirements of another industry, and the integrated whole produces no waste of any kind. A full use of raw materials, accompanied by a shift

towards renewable sources, means that utilization of the earth's resources can be brought back to sustainable levels.

BLOCK SCHEME OF THE LSIWC INTEGRATED ZERO EMISSIONS TECHNOLOGIES CLUSTER FOR DEMOLITION WOOD CONVERSION INTO

CLEAN FUEL

Railway sleepers

1

1

2

2 Railway sleepers

8.0 t/h 160 GJ/h 320 GJ/h

16.0 t/h

10.2 t/h; 204 GJ/h

20.4 t/h ; 408 GJ/h

1

2

10.3 kg/h; 0.5 GJ/h

20.6 kg/h; 1.0 GJ/h

Fuel

34.7 kg/h 69.4 kg/h 1 2

T C - S

M

CUDrive 85.6 kWhEnergy 85.6 kWh; 0.31 GJ/hDrive 171.2 kWhEnergy 171.2 kWh; 0.62 GJ/h

1

2

CO 2 88.6 kg/h 177.2 kg/h

1 2

Fuel 26.2 kg/h; 1.18 GJ/h

52.4 kg/h; 2.36 GJ/h

1

2 T

CO2

94.3 kg/h

188.6 kg/h2

1

Fuel34.9 kg/h; 1.58 GJ/h

69.8 kg/h; 3.16 GJ/h

1

2T

Drive 380 kW W S Energy 380 kW h; 1.36 GJ/h1 2 Charcoal:

2.4 t/h 4.9 t /h Clean-coal:

54.5 t/h 51.9 t/h 49.6 t/h

1 2

1 2 Co-generationpowerplant

300 MW

Ash 7.14 t/h 6.85 t/h 6.55 t/h1 2

150 MWth

150 MWe

Heat losses153 GJ; 42.2 MW

161 GJ45 MW

(CO2 – see Table )Flue gases

Flue gases : CO 2 - 1.02 t; 2.04 t

Noxious gases: NOx – 1.5; SO2 – 5.5; CO – 2.5 kg/h

NOx – 3.0; SO2 – 11.0; CO – 5.0 kg/h

1 2

1 2

3Rcarbonisation

plant

Drive 120 kW 120 kWh; 0.43 GJ/h 1 2 M

M

T

Coal - Mine

Drive 120 kW Energy 120 kW h ; 0.43 GJ/h

1 2

G

Drive 120 kW Drive 380 kWEnergy 120 kW h Energy 380 kWh

1 12 2

M W S

Fuel42.4 kg/h;1.92 GJ/h

84.8 kg/h; 3.84 GJ/h

1

2

CO2

90.5 kg/h

183.0 kg/h

1

2

7.55 t/h; 151 GJ/h

15.7 t/h; 302 GJ/h

1

2

T Railway sleepers

Material , energy flow and CO 2 emission ove rvie w ( 1 hour operation of the system)

Legend c arbonisation units transport (truck) cross – cutting, spliting wood shredder milling gr inding 5% energy of biomass origin 10% energy of biomass origin

CU

T

C - S

WS

M

G

1

2

I

II

III

(noxious substances – see Table )

0.43 GJ/h 1.36 GJ/h

•Emergy is the availability of energy (exergy) of one king that is used up in transformations directly and indirectly to make a product or service.

•Emergy recognizes that there are quality differences to energies of different form. While a calorie is a calorie, is a calorie, no matter how it is derived, a calorie of sunlight and a calorie of energy from the food cannot support the same types of work.

•Scienceman (1987) coined the phrase “energy memory” wich was shortened to emergy as a means of providing a name for a quantitative concept that was based on energy flow through system, but different from energy.

•Its capacity to evaluate technologies toward environmentally sound innovation, natural resources and human labor within the same framework makes Emergy Analysis a valuable and powerful addition to other environmental assessment tools such as Life Cycle Assessment and Exergy Analysis, etc.

XML – The eXtensibleMarkkup Lanquage

Local Non - renewable so urces

Enviro nment alSy st e ms

Economic Use

N Loca lRe newa ble Source s

R

Purchase d Resource s

Se rvic e s

Yie ld

F

Y

Yield (Y) = R+N+FEmergy Yield Ratio = Y/FEmergy Investment Ratio = F/(R+N)Environmental Loading Ratio = (F+N)/REmpower Density = (R+N+F)/area

Emergy Based Sustainibility Indices

LR = Local renewable resourcesWOOD AIR

LN = Local non-renewable resourcesFUEL (Diesel)

P = Purchased ResourcesELECTRICITY

S = Services and LabourHUMAN RESOURCES

E = Energy contents

Emergy yield (Y) = LR+LN+P+S

Transformity = Y/E

Emergy yield ratio (EYR) = Y/(P+S)

Emergy investment ratio (EIR) = (P+S)/(LR+LN)

Non-renewable to renewable ratio (NRR) = (LN+P)/LR

Services to resources = S/(LR+LN+P)

Environmental load ratio (ELR) = (P+S+LN)/LR

Emergy sustainability index = EYR/ELR

C&EN, 2004, vol. 82, No.38, 36-37.

BLOCK SCHEME FOR SYSTEM MODELING AND INDICES CALCULATION

ENERGY DIAGRAM OF RAILWAY SLEEPERS UTILIZATION SYSTEM

Charcoalcooler

Pit sawWood chopper

WOOD

FUEL

ELEC –TRICITY

AIR

Railwaysleepers

Transport

Block ofretorts

Furnace Brickwork

Timberdryer

Saw-dust

Flue gases, 800°C

Flue gases, 800°C

Pyroli-genousvapour

~ 350°C

Chunkwood +

creosote

Stack gases

Market

Charcoal

H20; CO2 CO; NOx; Dust

CLEAN COAL 300MW POWER PLANT ENERGY DIAGRAM

AIR

CLEANCOALFUEL

Furnacecombustion

Boiler Turbine +Generator

56 GJ4.938%

0%

Thermalenergy

Hot flue gases1260 GJ

80%80%

MarketAsh

0 GJ0%

100%

Steam1134 GJ

90%100%

Thermalenergy

Ash1 GJ

0.063%0.063%

16 GJT=192748.9257472

Heat loss126 GJ

10%0%

Electricity539 GJ

47.531%50%

Thermal energy539 GJ

47.531%50%

Heat loss1 GJ100%

0%

Cooler

Stack gases191 GJ +Heat loss123 GJ

19.937%19.937% Heat

Electricity

Chemical energy

1559 GJT=4.0E+04

Sleepers’ clean charcoal production unit. Calculated indices

0.1352Emergy sustainability index:

9.3611Environmental load ratio (ELR):

2.1515Services to resources:

2.2877Non-renewable to renewable ratio (NRR):

3.7695Emergy investment ratio (EIR):

1.2653Emergy yield ratio (EYR):

4701.0966Transformity:

5.016E+13Emergy yield (Y):

Clean coal 300 MW cogeneration power plant. Calculated indices

11.3383Emergy sustainability index:

20.3131Environmental load ratio (ELR):

0.0044Services to resources:

20.2206Non-renewable to renewable ratio (NRR):

0.0044Emergy investment ratio (EIR):

230.3157Emergy yield ratio (EYR):

60973.2707Transformity:

6.573E+16Emergy yield (Y):

Fuel, % on the total energy output basis Flue gases

CO2 of fossil

origin, t

Noxious substances, kg

Clean-coal Biofuel t/h 103 m3/h CO SO2 NOx

100 - 678.4 554.2 170.2 27.71 2.77 55.42

95 5 (charcoal) 673.2 550.0 161.8 27.50 2.75 55.00

90 10 (charcoal) 675.4 551.8 154.2 27.6 2.76 55.18

95 5 (railway sleepers) 693.2 566.3 161.2 28.31 2.83 56.63

90 10 (railway sleepers) 714.2 583.5 154.2 29.17 2.92 28.35

Emissions of noxious substances of 300 MW co-generation power plant stoked by clean fuel (clean coal + biomass)during 1 hour of operation

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020Year

Gg

CO

2 eq

.Kioto mērķisScenārijs "ar pasākumiem"Bāzes scenārijs

GHG emissions in Latvia and Kyoto Protocol demands. ♦- Kyoto Protocol demands to Latvia; ▲-scenarios without improvement of technologies; ■ – with improvement of technologies (needs 3R plants for imported coal pretreatment)

Conclusions1. LCA analysis on the bases of emergy approach

demonstrates that co-firing of clean coal with biomass decrease load on environment of the 300 MW power plant.

2. Emergy LCA analysis indices demonstrated sustainability of 300 MW clean coal cogeneration with biomass co-firing plant sustainability.

3. Analysis of Kyoto Protocol goals in case of Latvia showed that for realizing the best scenarios applying of 3R clean coal plant be very useful.

4. The Project demonstrated use of practically all principles of Zero Emissions concept and the clean coal technology is near zero emission.

Last important publications:

Gravitis J. Biorefinery and Lignocellulosics Economy Towards Zero Emissions In: Targeting Zero Emissions for the Utilisation of Renewable Resources (Biorefinery, Chemical Risk Reduction, Lignocellulosic Economy), Eds. K. Iijama, J. Gravitis, A. Sakoda, Tokyo, Japan, Published by UNU/IAS, ANESC/UT and IIS/UT, 1999, pp. 2-11.

Gravitis J. and Della Senta T. Global Prospects of Substituting Oil by Biomass In: World Forests, Markets and Policies, Eds. Matti Palo, Jussi Uusivuori and Gerardo Mery, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001, Chapter 2, 23-39.

Zandersons J., Gravitis J., Zhurinsh A., Kokorevics A., Kallavus U., and Suzuki. C. K. Carbon materials obtained from self-binding sugar cans bagasse and deciduous wood residues plastics. Biomass & Bioenergy, 2004, vol. 26, pp. 345-360.

Gravitis J., Zandersons J., Vedernikov N., Kruma I., and Ozols-Kalnins. V. Clustering of bio-products technologies for zero emissions and eco-efficiency. Industrial Crops & Products, 2004, vol. 20, Issue 2, pp. 169-180.

Gravitis J., Zandersons J., Ozols-Kalnins V. and Kokorevics A. How Can the Baltic Countries’Resources be Oriented towards Sustainability? In: Environmental Education, Communication and Sustainability, Vol. 15, “Integrative Approaches Towards Sustainability in the Baltic Sea Region”, Walter Leal Filho and Arnolds Ubelis eds. Peter Lang Publishers House, Frankfurt am Maim, Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Wien, 2004, pp. 67-85.

Thank you for your attention