Premium
GHGs emission and mitigation burden for power plants in western china considering N 2 O and SO 2 removal
Author(s) -
Fu Shijun
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
environmental progress and sustainable energy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.495
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1944-7450
pISSN - 1944-7442
DOI - 10.1002/ep.13224
Subject(s) - greenhouse gas , emission intensity , coal , environmental science , china , power station , marginal abatement cost , natural resource economics , depreciation (economics) , combustion , electricity , carbon capture and storage (timeline) , environmental engineering , electricity generation , environmental economics , power (physics) , waste management , engineering , economics , climate change , chemistry , geography , physics , economic growth , human capital , ecology , archaeology , biology , quantum mechanics , financial capital , excitation , organic chemistry , electrical engineering , capital formation
Focusing on greenhouse gases (GHGs), this article explores the actual emissions and mitigation burden of coal‐fired power plants in western region of China. Utilizing the 2006 IPCC technology‐detailed methodology, this article developed a coal content‐based GHG measurement system under consideration of N 2 O emission and SO 2 removal, thereafter employed it to evaluate 151 power plants in western China in 2014. At regional level, the three segmented emission sources: CO 2 and N 2 O from coal combustion, and CO 2 from sulfur content depreciation, each contributes to emission intensity at 1011.26, 8.24 and 6.09 gCO 2 e/KWh, respectively. At plant‐specific level, emission intensity is very different, with an average of 1025.60 as well as an interval of 722.38–1796.67 gCO 2 e/KWh, which implies large gap in mitigation burden among power plants. Comparing mitigation cost of two pathways: CCS technology and carbon market mechanism, it is verified that on average, the former induces electricity price raised by 64.84%–97.26%, while the latter only induces 8.32% upward. From mitigation burden perspective, carbon market is more feasible than CCS technology to motivate power plant to carry out GHGs abatement in the short‐run period. © 2019 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Environ Prog, 38: e13224, 2019