nach oben

Erschienen in:

2011 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Global Clean Gas Process Synthesis and Optimisation

verfasst von : Mar Pérez-Fortes, Aarón D. Bojarski

Erschienen in: Syngas from Waste

Verlag: Springer London

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This chapter begins with an introduction to the different possible metrics related to clean gas process synthesis and its subsequent usage. Latter, the different techniques for tackling with multiple criteria are presented, emphasising the use of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) and multi-objective optimisation (MOO). The different criteria elected here for optimisation are described and later used as key performance indicators (KPI) for the proposed scenarios, in chapter “Selection of Best Designs for Specific Applications”. Finally, a case study related to the operation of an IGCC plant considering coal–petcoke or natural gas as a fuel is assessed applying the optimization concepts introduced here and taking into account the operation considerations developed in this and in previous chapters.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Process Integration: HEN Synthesis, Exergy Opportunities

Nächstes Kapitel Selection of Best Designs for Specific Applications

In many cases, the properties have not been measured for a large number of chemicals, and the measurements that have been made frequently show wide ranges of variation.

Persistence is related to what extent materials will accumulate; at one extreme of behaviour are materials that are not degradable and thus accumulate while at the other extreme are highly degradable materials that will quickly reach an essentially steady level in the environment as their rate of release is balanced by their destruction. In this sense, persistence is associated to the substance resistance to chemical (hydrolysis, photolysis, etc.) or biological (biodegradation, metabolism, etc.) degradation or breakdown.

Bioaccumulation is related to the chemical tendency to become increasingly concentrated (in fat tissues) as one moves up along the food chain from microorganism to mammals.

Toxicity is the most contentious/disagreeable area of concern where multiple tests are available depending on the endpoint (lethality, fecundity, endocrine disruption, etc.), each chemical has different effects and consequently different toxicity.

Seppala J, Basson L, Norris G (2002) Decision analysis frameworks for life-cycle impact assessment. J Ind Ecol 5(4):45–68CrossRef

Azapagic A, Perdan S (2005) An integrated sustainability decision-support framework. Part I: problem structuring. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol 12:98–111CrossRef

Azapagic A, Perdan S (2005) An integrated sustainability decision-support framework. Part II: problem analysis. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol 12:112–130CrossRef

Sharratt P (1999) Environmental criteria in design. Comput Chem Eng 23(10):1469–1475CrossRef

Tanzil D, Beloff BR (2006) Assessing impacts: overview on sustainability indicators and metrics. Environ Qual Manage Summer 2006:41–56CrossRef

Constable D, Jimenez-Gonzalez C, Lapkin A (2008) Process metrics. In: Lapkin A, Constable D (eds) Green chemistry metrics: measuring and monitoring sustainable processes. Chap. 6. Wiley, Chichester, West Sussex, pp 228–247

Azapagic A, Perdan S (2000) Indicators of sustainable development for industry: a general framework. Process Saf Environ Prot 78(4):243–261CrossRef

Pintaric ZN, Kravanja Z (2006) Selection of the economic objective function for the optimisation of process flow sheets. Ind Eng Chem Res 45(12):4222–4232CrossRef

Biegler L, Grossmann I, Westerberg A (1997) Systematic methods of chemical process design. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

10.

Peters M, Timmerhaus K (1991) Plant design and economics for chemical engineers, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, Singapore

11.

Koukouzas N, Katsiadakis A, Karlopoulos E, Kakaras E (2008) Co-gasification of solid waste and lignite–a case study for western macedonia. Waste Manage 28:1263–1275CrossRef

12.

Ordorica-Garcia G, Douglas P, Croiset E, Zheng LG (2006) Technoeconomic evaluation of IGCC power plants for CO₂ avoidance. Energy Convers Manage 47:2250–2259CrossRef

13.

Frey HC (1991) Probabilistic modeling of innovative clean coal technologies: implications for research planning and technology evaluation. PhD thesis, Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

14.

Frey HC, Akunuri N (2001) Probabilistic modeling and evaluation of the performance, emissions, and cost of texaco gasifier-based integrated gasification combined cycle systems using Aspen. Technical report. Computational Laboratory for Energy, Air, and Risk Department of Civil Engineering North Carolina State University Raleigh, NC

15.

Electric Power Research Institute [EPRI] TAG(tm) - Technical Assessment Guide, Volume 1: Electricity Supply - 1986 (1986) EPRI P-4463-SR. Electric Power Research Institute, Inc

16.

Ulrich GD, Vasudevan PT (2004) Chemical engineering process design and economics: a practical guide, 2nd edn. Sheridan Books, Michigan

17.

Pérez-Fortes M, Bojarski AD, Velo E, Puigjaner L (2010) IGCC power plants: conceptual design and techno-economic optimisation. In: Clean energy: resources, production and developments. Energy science, engineering and technology, Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge NY

18.

Hamelink CN, Faaij APC (2002) Future prospects for production of methanol and hydrogen from biomass. J Power Sources 111:1–22CrossRef

19.

van Vliet PPR, Faaij APC, Turkenburg WC (2009) Fischer–Tropsch diesel production in a well-to-wheel perspective: a carbon, energy flow and cost analysis. Energy Convers Manage 50:855–876CrossRef

20.

Metz B, Davidson O, Coninck H, Loos M, Meyer L (2005) Special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage. Chap 3. International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Switzerland

21.

Bare J, Norris G, Pennington D, Mc Kone T (2003) TRACI, The tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. J Ind Ecol 6(3–4):49–78

22.

Finnveden G, Hauschild M, Ekvall T, Guinee J, Heijungs R, Hellweg S, Koehler A, Pennington D, Suh S (2009) Recent developments in life cycle assessment. J Environ Manage 91(1):1–21CrossRef

23.

Stefanis S, Pistikopoulos E (1997) Methodology for environmental risk assessment of industrial nonroutine releases. Ind Eng Chem Res 36(9):3694–3707CrossRef

24.

Allen D, Shonnard D, Prothero S (2002) Evaluating environmental performance during process synthesis. In: Allen D, Shonnard R (eds) Green engineering: environmentally conscious design of chemical processes. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, pp 199–249

25.

Sinclair-Rosselot K, Allen D (2002) Flowsheet analysis for pollution prevention. In: Allen D, Shonnard R (eds) Green engineering: environmentally conscious design of chemical processes. Prentice Hall PTR, New Jersey, pp 309–359

26.

Mackay D (2001) Multimedia environmental models: the fugacity approach, 2nd edn. CRC Press LLC, Boca RatonCrossRef

27.

Sonnemann G (2002) Environmental damage estimations in industrial process chains: methodology development with a case study on waste incineration and a special focus on human health. PhD thesis, Chemical Engineering Department, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain

28.

Allen D, Shonnard D (2002) Green engineering: environmentally conscious design of chemical processes, Prentice Hall PTR, New Jersey, Ch.2 pp 35-62

29.

Cameron I, Raman R (2005) Process systems risk management, vol 6 process systems engineering. Elsevier, Amsterdam

30.

de Haes H, Jolliet O, Finnveden G, Hauschild M, Krewitt W, Muller-Wenk R (1999) Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment, background document for the second working group on life cycle impact assessment of SETAC-Europe (WIA-2). Int J Life Cycle Assess 74:66–74CrossRef

31.

Humbert S, Margni M, Jolliet O (2005) IMPACT 2002+: user guide draft for version 2.1. Technical report, Industrial Ecology & Life Cycle Systems Group, GECOS, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland

32.

Guinee J, Gorree M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A, van Oers L, Sleeswijk A, Suh S, de Haes H, de Brujin H, van Duin R, Huijbregts M, Lindeijer E, Roorda A, van-der Ven B, Weidema B (2001) Life cycle assessment. An operational guide to the ISO standards. Part 3: scientific background ministry of housing spatial planning and the environment (VROM) and centre of environmental science. Leiden University (CML), The Netherlands

33.

Heijungs R, Guinee J, Huppes G, Lankreijer R, de Haes H, Wegener A, Sleeswijk A, Ansems M, Eggels PG, van Duin R, de Goede HP (1992) Environmental life cycle assessment of products. Center for environmental studies (CML), vol 1 and 2. Leiden University, The Netherlands

34.

Hauschild M, Potting J (2004) Spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment: the EDIP-2003 methodology. Guidelines from the Danish EPA. The Danish Ministry of the Environment, Denmark

35.

Wenzel H, Hauschild M, Alting L (1997) Environmental assessment of products, Vol. 1: methodology tools and case studies in product development. Chapman & Hall, London

36.

Bare J (2002) Developing a consistent decision-making framework by using the US EPA’s TRACI. Technical report. Systems Analysis Branch, Sustainable Technology Division, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency Cincinnati, United States

37.

Goedkoop M, Spriensma R (2001) The eco-indicator 99: a damage oriented methods for life cycle impact assessment, methodology report. Technical report. Pré Consultants BV, Amersfoort, The Netherlands

38.

Steen B (1999) A systematic approach to environmental priority strategies in product development (EPS). Version 2000—General system characteristics, CPM report 1999:4. Technical report. Centre for Environmental Assessment of Products and Material Systems (CPM). Chalmers University of Technology, Technical Environmental Planning, Göteborg, Sweden

39.

Heijungs R, Guinee J, Kleijn R, Rovers V (2007) Bias in normalization: causes, consequences, detection and remedies. Int J LCA 12(4):211–216CrossRef

40.

Huijbregts M, Breedveld L, Huppes G, de Koning A, van Oers L, Suh S (1995) Normalisation figures for environmental life-cycle assessment: the Netherlands (1997/1998), Western Europe (1995) and the world (1990 and 1995). J Clean Prod 11(7):737–748CrossRef

41.

Gandibleux X, Sevaux M, Sörensen K, T’Kindt V (2004) Metaheuristics for multiobjective optimisation. Series: lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems, vol 535. Springer, BerlinCrossRef

42.

Wiecek MM, Ehrgott M, Fadel G, Figueira JR (2008) Multiple criteria decision making for engineering. Omega-Int J Manage Sci 36:337–339CrossRef

43.

Cano-Ruiz J, McRae G (1998) Environmentally conscious chemical process design. Annu Rev Energy Environ 23:499–536CrossRef

44.

Messac A, Ismail-Yahaya A, Mattson C (2003) The normalized normal constraint method for generating the pareto frontier. Struct Multidisciplinary Optim 25:86–98MathSciNetCrossRef

45.

Steuer RE (1986) Multiple criteria optimisation: theory computation and application, Chap 14. Wiley series in probability and mathematical statistics—applied. John Wiley & sons, New York

46.

Das I, Dennis JE (1998) Normal-boundary intersection: a new method for generating the pareto surface in nonlinear multicriteria optimisation problems. SIAM J Optim 8:631–657MathSciNetMATHCrossRef

47.

Saaty T (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New YorkMATH

48.

Hwang C, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making. Springer-Verlag, BerlinMATH

49.

Descamps C, Bouallou C, Kanniche M (2008) Efficiency of an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plant including CO₂ removal. Energy 33:874–881CrossRef

50.

Desideri U, Paolucci A (1999) Performance modeling of a carbon dioxide removal system for power plants. Energy Convers Manage 40:1899–1915CrossRef

51.

Kanniche M, Bouallob C (2007) CO₂ capture study in advanced integrated gasification combined cycle. Appl Therm Eng 27:2693–2702CrossRef

52.

Chen C, Rubin ES (2009) CO₂ control technology effects on IGCC plant performance and cost. Energy Policy 37:915–924CrossRef

53.

Amann JM, Kanniche M, Bouallou C (2009) Natural gas combined cycle power plant modified into an O₂/CO₂ cycle for CO₂ capture. Energy Convers Manage 50:510–521CrossRef

54.

Delattin F, de Ruyck J, Bram S (2009) Detailed study of the impact of co-utilization of biomass in a natural gas combined cycle power plant through perturbation analysis. Appl Energy 86:622–629CrossRef

55.

Corti A, Lombardi L (2004) Biomass integrated gasification combined cycle with reduced CO₂ emissions: performance analysis and life cycle assessment (LCA). Energy 29:2109–2124CrossRef

56.

Fiaschi D, Lombardi L (2002) Integrated gasifier combined cycle plant with integrated CO₂–H₂S removal: performance analysis, life cycle assessment and exergetic life cycle assessment. Int J Appl Thermodynamics 5(1):13–24

57.

Huijbregts M, Hellweg S, Frischknecht R, Hendriks J (2007) Ecological footprint accounting in the life cycle assessment of products. Ecol Econom 64:798–807CrossRef

58.

Huijbregts M, Rombouts L, Hellweg S, Frischknecht R, van-de Meent D, Ragas A, Reijnders L, Struijs J (2006) Is cumulative fossil energy demand a useful indicator for the environmental performance of products? Environ Sci Technol 40:641–648CrossRef

59.

de Schryver A, Goedkoop M, Oele M (2006) Introduction to LCA with simapro 7. Technical report. Pre-Product Ecology Consultants, Amersfoort, The Netherlands

60.

Ecoinvent (2008) The ecoinvent database V2.0. Technical report. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Switzerland

61.

Jungbluth N (2007) Erdöl. In: Dones R (ed) Sachbilanzen von energiesystemen: Grundlagen für den ökologischen vergleich von energiesystemen und den einbezug von energiesystemen in ökobilanzen für die schweiz, Ecoinvent Report No. 6-IV. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Duebendorf

Titel: Global Clean Gas Process Synthesis and Optimisation
verfasst von: Mar Pérez-Fortes
Aarón D. Bojarski
Verlag: Springer London
Buch: Syngas from Waste
Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-539-2

Electronic ISBN: 978-0-85729-540-8

Copyright-Jahr: 2011
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-540-8_10