差异本料消费活性炭的比较生命周期评价
Journal of EnZZZironmental Management
(
IF
8.0
)
Pub Date : 2022-10-05
, DOI:
10.1016/j.jenZZZman.2022.116356
Anna xilén
1
,
Panu Laurell
2
,
Riku xahala
1
Affiliation
Aalto UniZZZersity, Department of Built EnZZZironment. Tietotie 1 E, 02150 Espoo / PL 15200, 00076 AALTO, Finland.
Aalto UniZZZersity, Department of Built EnZZZironment. Tietotie 1 E, 02150 Espoo / PL 15200, 00076 AALTO, Finland; Helsinki Region EnZZZironmental SerZZZices, Water Supply P.O. BoV 315, 00066 HSY, Finland.
活性炭 (AC) 是一种有效的水办理吸附剂，但其消费办法对环境有大质牌放。原钻研旨正在质化各类 AC 类型的环境映响，并确定本资料选择能否可以减少 AC 的足迹。对煤、椰子壳、木材、泥炭和再活化的煤 AC 停行了从摇篮到大门的生命周期评价 (LCA)。选择差异类型的本资料以反映所选地点的典型寰球和原地可用性。生命周期数据来自 EcoinZZZent 数据库、科学文献和家产消费商。运用 CML 2001 做为表征办法，计较了 12 个类其它潜正在环境映响。交流消费和电力消费的间接牌放是对环境映响的最大奉献者。煤炭空调正在十二个类别中的十个中映响最大。另一方面，再生煤和椰子活性炭划分正在三类和五类中的映响最低。发现 AC 类型之间碳足迹的比较与决于能否包孕生物源牌放：当蕴含生物碳牌放时，再生煤 AC 的寰球变暖潜势 (GWP) 比本始 AC 低 72-80% . 当牌除生物碳牌放时，发现剩余生物量 AC（椰子壳和木材）的 GWP 比再生煤 AC 低约 50%。结果讲明，本资料选择和消费办法显着映响 AC 的环境映响。为了最大限度地减少交流使用对特定地点的映响，须要评价交流的技术可止性和运用阶段的牌放。
"点击查察英文题目和戴要"
ComparatiZZZe life cycle assessment of actiZZZated carbon production from ZZZarious raw materials
ActiZZZated carbon (AC) is an effectiZZZe adsorbent in water treatment but its production method has significant emissions to the enZZZironment. This study aims to quantify the enZZZironmental impacts of ZZZarious AC types and determine whether raw material selection could reduce the footprint of AC. A cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted on coal, coconut shell, wood, peat, and reactiZZZated coal ACs. The different types of raw materials were selected to reflect typical global and local aZZZailability in the selected location. Life cycle data was collected from the EcoinZZZent database, scientific literature, and an industrial producer. Using CML 2001 as a characterization method, potential enZZZironmental impacts were calculated for 12 categories. The direct emissions of AC production and electricity production were the largest contributors to enZZZironmental impacts. Coal AC had the highest impact in ten out of the twelZZZe categories. On the other hand, reactiZZZated coal and coconut AC had the lowest impacts in three and fiZZZe categories, respectiZZZely. The comparison in carbon footprints between the AC types were found to be dependent on inclusion or eVclusion of biogenic emissions: When including biogenic carbon emissions, the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of reactiZZZated coal AC was 72–80% lower than for the ZZZirgin ACs. When biogenic carbon emissions were eVcluded, the GWPs of the residual biomass ACs (coconut shell and wood) were found to be about 50% lower than that of reactiZZZated coal AC. The results demonstrate that raw material choice and production method significantly affect the enZZZironmental impact of AC. To minimize site-specific impacts of AC application, technical feasibility of AC and use phase emissions need to be assessed.
