English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This paper presents the results of analyzing the efficiency of the following five fuel types: dry coal, wet coal processing waste, coal–water slurry, and two waste-derived slurries. In the calculations, we employed 16 criteria related to the energy industry, economy, social aspects, safety at plants, and environmental protection. We used the experimental data, obtained from the combustion of the fuels under study at three heating temperatures (700 °C, 800 °C, and 900 °C). Three countries were analyzed, where all of them have a high share of using fossil fuels in the energy industry: Japan, China, and Russia. The total performance indicator was calculated using three multiple-criteria decision analysis techniques (weighted sum method, weighted product method, and analytic hierarchy process). The choice of weight coefficients was confirmed for each method. We found that coal and coal–water slurry had the lowest integral efficiency indicators (0.016–0.535 and 0.045–0.566, respectively). The maximum effect was achieved when using waste-derived slurry with used turbine oil (0.190–0.800) and coal processing waste (0.535–0.907). There were, on average, 3%–60% differences in the integral efficiency indicator for the same fuel in different countries. The difference in the efficiency indicator of the same fuel in different countries was on average 3%–60%; with changes in temperature, the difference in efficiency was 5%–20%; and when changing the calculation procedure, the difference was 10%–90%.

Multi-Criteria Efficiency Analysis of Using Waste-Based Fuel Mixtures in the Power Industries of China, Japan, and Russia