ISSN 00406015, Thermal Engineering, 2015, Vol. 62, No. 8, pp. 539–546. © Pleiades Publishing, Inc., 2015. Original Russian Text © E.N. Sosnina, O.V. Masleeva, E.V. Kryukov, 2015, published in Teploenergetika.
ENERGY CONSERVATION, NEW AND RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES
Comparative Environmental Assessment of Unconventional Power Installations E. N. Sosnina, O. V. Masleeva, and E. V. Kryukov Nizhny Novgorod State Technical University, ul. Minina 24, Nizhny Novgorod, 603950 Russia email:
[email protected] Abstract—Procedure of the strategic environmental assessment of the power installations operating on the basis of renewable energy sources (RES) was developed and described. This procedure takes into account not only the operational process of the power installation but also the whole life cycles: from the production and distribution of power resources for manufacturing of the power installations to the process of their recovery. Such an approach gives an opportunity to make a more comprehensive assessment of the influence of the power installations on environments and may be used during adaptation of the current regulations and devel opment of new regulations for application of different types of unconventional power installations with due account of the ecological factor. Application of the procedure of the integrated environmental assessment in the context of miniHPP (Hydro Power Plant); wind, solar, and biogas power installations; and traditional power installation operating natural gas was considered. Comparison of environmental influence revealed advantages of new energy technologies compared to traditional ones. It is shown that solar energy installa tions hardly pollute the environment during operation, but the negative influence of the mining operations and manufacturing and utilization of the materials used for solar modules is maximum. Biogas power instal lations are on the second place as concerns the impact on the environment due to the considerable mass of the biogas installation and gas reciprocating engine. The minimum impact on the environment is exerted by the miniHPP. Consumption of material and energy resources for the production of the traditional power installation is less compared to power installations on RES; however, this factor incomparably increases when taking into account the fuel extraction and transfer. The greatest impact on the environment is exerted by the operational process of the traditional power installations. Keywords: renewable energy sources, power installations, procedure, comprehensive environmental assess ment, life cycle DOI: 10.1134/S0040601515080078
Decrease of the negative effect of the fuelpower complex (FPC) in Russia during its stable develop ment aimed at a positive ecological environment in the country is a federal issue. In the project of the Power Strategy of Russia for the period of up to 2035 [1], the care for the ecological safety and stable development of the power economy with “minimization of the neg ative impact of the development, manufacturing, transportation, and consumption of power resources on environment, climate, and public health” is referred to the strategic goal of the ecological policy in the power energy. It is stressed that development of “green power” in Russia is insufficient. One of the main targets stated in the State Program of the Russian Federation “Power Efficiency and Development” [2], April 2014, is the decrease of the maninduced impact of the fuelpower complex of the country on the envi ronment. The solution of the problem mainly depends on the renewable energy sources. In accordance with the program, by 2020, the share of the power produc tion generated by RES installations shall become
approximately 2.5% of the power production (without HPP of the rated capacity more than 25 MW). With due regard for geographical and climate pat terns, the main potential of the RES application in Russia is connected with hydraulic, bio, wind, and solar power [3, 4]. Extensive RES application will require overall assessment of their environmental friendliness [5]. Traditional ecological cleanliness of the RES installations is assessed during the operation process only. Furthermore, the environmental impact of min ing for the manufacturing of the power installations operating on the basis of RES (hereinafter, called PI for RES) and manufacturing processes of those power installations (PI) and their utilization at the end of the service life is never discussed. When choosing PI for RES, it is necessary to carry out the comprehensive analysis of their environmental friendliness, which requires the development of a new approach to the environmental assessment of the RES impact with due account of not only the operational process but also the whole life cycle of the power installation for RES,
539
540
SOSNINA et al.
starting from the development and transportation of the power resources used for the PI manufacturing to their utilization. PROCEDURE OF THE STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF RES In order to solve this problem, the authors devel oped the procedure of the strategic environmental assessment of RES, which is based on the ecodesign provisions [6] and methods of the life cycle evaluation. The idea of the latter is the consideration of the input and output material flows of the unit processes, as well as possible impact on the environment during the whole life cycle of the PI for RES [7]. Methods of the strategic environmental assessment of RES include four stages: (1) Inventory system analysis; (2) Determination of the system boundaries and separation on the unit processes; (3) Determination of the impact level on the envi ronment; and (4) Analysis of results. The initial data for the inventory analysis are mate rials required for manufacturing of the PI for RES functional units. Materials of main PI elements with a weight of more than 95% of the total weight of the PI structural element [8] are considered in order to decrease the volume of analyzed information and to exclude peculiarities concerning power installations of different manufacturers. When determining the system boundaries, the PI for RES life cycle is divided into unit processes starting from production of natural resources for manufacturing of the PI elements to the utilization of the considered power installations. The lifecycle framework is made; it involves the complex of processes to be selected on the basis of the product type and its production. The integral environmental assessment is made on the third stage; it includes consideration of three flows: (1) Consumption of natural resources (material flow); (2) Electric energy consumption (power flow); and (3) Level of the environmental pollution (ecologi cal flow). The method of material balances is used for the assessment of consumption of natural resources [9], while the method of the specific power consumption per product unit (per 1 ton of the product or item) is used for electrical energy consumption [10]. The method based on the emission factor is used for the assessment of the environmental impact (carbon intensity per 1 t of the product or 1 m3) [11]. During comparison of PIs of different power, the calculation of the final values of flows (material, energy, ecological) is carried out on the basis of the rel
ative values (in units per 1 kW of the available PI capacity). The modified Leopold matrix is made for the analy sis of the complex environmental impact of PI for RES [12]; columns correspond to the different stages of the PI life cycle and rows correspond to the considered eco logical factors (emissions into atmosphere, discharge of sewage waters, waste generation, noise, thermal pollu tion, electromagnetic pollution). The intensity of the impact of each ecological factor is shown at the inter section of rows and columns. The Leopold matrix is made on the basis of the method of expert assessment. Impact of factors is assessed by a threepoint grading scale: 3 points is maximum negative impact, 2 points is average negative impact, 1 point is minimum negative impact, and 0 points is no impact. Complex environmental assessment is concluded by the analysis of the obtained results. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROCEDURE Application of the developed procedure is consid ered in the context of four different types PI for RES and traditional PI operation on natural gas: (1) A Musson wind generator with a total capacity of 30 kW [13]; (2) MiniHPP INSET pr30 with a total capacity of 30 kW [14]; (3) Solar PI with a total capacity of 30 kW contain ing 120 solar modules Saana 250 LM3 MBW with a unit capacity 0.25 kW each [15]; (4) Biogas PI containing biogas BIOEN1 OOO GREENTEK [16], operating on the manure of the stock breeding complex having 700 cows and gas engine generator station miniTPP Caterpillar DM8660 with a total capacity of 103 kW [17] operat ing on biogas; and (5) Gas engine generator station Caterpillar G3406 with a total capacity of 125 kW operating on natural gas. Technical characteristics are given in Table 1. Accu mulators of the wind and solar PI required for consum ers supply in case of insufficiency of the first energy car rier or the lack of the energy carrier (wind or sun) are selected based on working time (24 h at 1 kW). During calculations, it is conventional that fuel transportation for the gas engine generator station is carried out from the gasdistributing plant located at the distance of 100 m. Density of the natural gas is 0.8 kg/m3. The service life of the power installation is 12 years. Results of the inventory analysis are given in Table 2. Since power installations of different power are under consideration (power of the biogas PI is 103 kW, gas engine generator station is 125 kW, and other PI are 30 kW each), calculations are carried out in relative units (per 1 kW of the PI total capacity). Components equal for all mentioned power installations (supply THERMAL ENGINEERING
Vol. 62
No. 8
2015
COMPARATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
541
Table 1. Specifications of power installations Type of power installation Wind power installation
Solar power installation
Quality class
Weight of 1 item, kg
Characteristics
Musson
Capacity 30 kW
3180
Accumulator Volta ST200
Voltage 12 V (13 pcs)
Saana 250 LM3 MBW
Overall capacity, 30 kW (120 modules, 0.25 kW each)
60 21.1
Accumulators Volta ST200 Voltage 12 V (13 pcs) MiniHPP
INSET Pr 30
Biogas power installation
BIOEN
Gas engine generator station
60 2 × 103
Capacity 30 kW
12 × 103
–
Caterpillar DM8660
Capacity103 kW
4830
Caterpillar G3406
Capacity 125 kW Gas consumption 371 thousand m3/year
4928
Table 2. Inventory analysis of power installations Type of power installation
Power installation component
Wind power installation
Solar power installation
MiniHPP
Biogas power installation
Gas engine generator station
Applied materials
Generator
Steel, copper
Blades
Plastic
Support
Steel
Accumulators
Lead, sulfuric acid, plastic
Solar module
Silicon
Body
Aluminum, glass
Support
Steel
Accumulators
Lead, sulfuric acid, plastic
Generator
Steel, copper
Hydraulic turbine
Steel
Engine
Steel, Cast iron, aluminum
Generator
Steel, copper
Container
Steel
Engine
Steel, Cast iron, aluminum
Generator
Steel, copper
Container
Steel
Gas pipeline from the gas distribution Steel substation to the gas engine generator station
cables, control cabinets and automatic equipment, foundations) are excluded from the process of assess ment. Boundaries of the considered system are deter mined: the low limit is the mining process and the upper limit is utilization of power installations. The given analysis showed that the PI life cycle may be divided into the following unit process (stages): (1) Mining (iron ore, copper ore and lead ore, bauxites, pyrites, gas, oil, coal and natural gas); THERMAL ENGINEERING
Vol. 62
No. 8
2015
(2) Production of materials (cast iron, steel, lead, copper, silicon, glass, plastic, sulfuric acid); (3) PI manufacturing; (4) PI operation; and (5) PI utilization. Every PI has a life cycle pattern with transport links (t) between all unit processes. The life cycle pattern of the wind PI is given in Fig. 1.
542
SOSNINA et al.
Iron ore production
Copper ore production
t
t
Supports manufacturing
t
t
Manufacturing of wind generators
t
Blades manufacturing
t
Steel production
t
Copper production
t
Plastic production
t
Lead ore production
t
Lead production
t
Pyrites production
t
Sulfuric acid production
Oil production
t
Oil production
Plastic production
Electrical power generation
t Wind power installations
t Utilization
t
Accumulators manufacturing
t
t
Fig. 1. Life cycle pattern of the wind power installation.
Analysis of the material flow of the life cycle of the considered PI is given; it includes the calculation of the natural resources and water consumption. Calculation of natural resources consumption is given on the basis of the material weight used for PI manufacturing and specific values of waste formation [18] on all stages of the life cycle. Calculation results are given in Table 3 and Fig. 2. Values for the gas engine generator station are given without regard for fuel extraction and transportation.
Calculation of water consumption for PI manufac turing is made in accordance with specific norms of water consumption for technological operations [19]. Calculation data are given in Table 4 and Fig. 3. Energy flow in all stages of the PI life cycle was cal culated by specific consumption of the electrical energy per the product unit [20]. Results of calcula tions are given in Table 5 and Fig. 4. The integrated analysis of the environmental impact of the considered PI was carried out with due 20
1.4 Water consumption, m3/kW
Production of natural resources, t/kW
1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Wind Solar MiniHPP Biogas GEGS power power power installation installation installation Fig. 2. Consumption of natural resources at the stages of the PI life cycle.
15
10
5
0
Wind Solar MiniHPP Biogas GEGS power power power installation installation installation
Fig. 3. Water consumption at the stages of the PI life cycle. THERMAL ENGINEERING
Vol. 62
No. 8
2015
COMPARATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
543
Table 3. Calculation data for the natural resources consumption Consumption of natural resources for PI manufacturing, t Natural resources
miniHPP
biogas power installation
gas engine generator station GEGS
fuel (natural gas)
12.2
24.0
7.9
63.5
15.9
–
Copper ore
1.5
–
1.5
5.8
5.8
–
Oil
0.2
0.1
–
–
–
–
Lead ore
5.6
5.6
–
–
–
–
Pyrites
1.4
1.4
–
–
–
–
Sand
–
5.0
–
–
–
–
Bauxites
–
3.6
–
5.3
5.3
–
Silicon dioxide
–
0.7
–
–
–
–
Natural gas
–
–
–
–
–
3561.6
20.9
40.4
9.4
74.3
27.0
3561.6
0.7
1.3
0.3
0.7
0.2
28.5
Total, t Total, t/kW
account of six ecological factors: emissions into atmo sphere, discharge of sewage waters, waste generation, noise, thermal pollution, and electromagnetic pollu tion. The impact intensity of the ecological factors at the stages of the PI life cycle (mining, production, operation, utilization) was assessed by the threepoint system by elements and PI applied materials found by the inventory analysis (Table 2). Table 6 gives the extended modified Leopold matrix where PI estimates are determined by summing up the points. Table 7 gives the overall results of the environmen tal assessment of the different stages of the PI cycle obtained by Table 6 data taking into account the weight of the PI components. Figure 5 shows the final integral assessment of the PI life cycle by directions of action: consumption of natural resources, water, electrical energy, and assess ment of the environmental pollution. Characteristic curves are made in relative units, which are calculated by the ratio to maximum value of the corresponding factor. The integrated environmental assessment showed that solar PI hardly pollute the environment during operation, but the environmental impact is maximum in the course of mining, manufacturing, and utiliza tion of the materials used for solar modules. The bio gas PI is on the second place as concerns the impact on the environment, because of considerable weight of the biogas installation and the gaspiston engine. The most low assessment among considered PI for RES THERMAL ENGINEERING
Vol. 62
No. 8
2015
was given to the miniTPP due to the low weight of the installation and minimum environmental impact. Consumption of resources for the traditional PI is less than for the production of the PI for RES. The most environmental impact is given by the operational process. However, allowing for fuel extraction and transportation, the values of material and energy resources increase incomparably. As concerns PI for RE, those trends of resources consumption are not available.
Electrical energy consumption, (kW h)/kW
Iron ore
wind power solar power installation installation
800
Utilization Production Mining
600 400 200 0 Wind Solar MiniHPP Biogas GEGS power power power installation installation installation
Fig. 4. Electrical power consumption at the stages of the PI life cycle.
544
SOSNINA et al.
Table 4. Calculation data for the water consumption in the process of the PI life cycle Aim of the water consumption (production) Steel Copper Plastic Lead Sulfuric acid Generator Glass Silicon Aluminum Cast iron Engine Natural gas Total, m3 Total, m3/kW
Water consumption, m3 wind power installation
colar power installation
miniHPP
biogas power installation
222.8 1.6 7.2 37.0 1.4 33.0 – – – – – – 303.0 10.1
437.5 – 2.0 37.0 1.5 – 70.2 27.3 8.4 – – – 583.9 19.5
143.1 1.6 – – – 33.0 – – – – – – 177.7 5.9
978.2 6.2 – – – 33.0 – – 12.5 182.7 33.0 – 1245.6 12.1
gas engine generator station GEGS
fuel (natural gas)
110.4 6.2 – – – 33.0 – – 12.5 182.7 33.0 – 377.8 3.0
– – – – – – – – – – – 105 105 854.8
Table 5. Calculation data for the power flow in the process of the PI life cycle Power consumption, kW h Stages of the PI life cycle
wind power solar power installation installation
Mining and transporta tion Production Utilization Total, kW h Total, (kW h)/kW
1455
2340 2 × 104 2441 2.4 × 104 798
3020 932 5407 180
gas engine generator station based on natural gas GEGS fuel (natural gas)
biogas power installation
miniHPP 549
4479
1241
6 × 105
1553 444 2546 85
2.5 × 104 4071 3 × 104 280
1.2 × 104 1468 1.4 × 104 115
– – 6 × 105 4753
Table 6. Integrated modified Leopold matrix for the life cycle stages of power installations Stages of the PI life cycle
Mining
Production
Operation
Utilization
Mining
Production
Operation
Utilization
Mining
Production
Operation
Utilization
Mining
Production
Operation
Utilization
gas engine generator station
Utilization
Emissions to 5 the ambient air Discharge of 5 sewage waters Waste genera 7 tion Noise 5 Thermal pollu 0 tion Electromag 0 netic pollution Total 22
biogas power installation
miniHPP
Operation
Mining
Ecological factor
solar power installation
Production
wind power installation
17
0
6
6
18
0
5
2
4
0
2
3
7
3
4
4
7
3
4
17
0
6
6
18
0
4
2
4
0
2
3
7
2
4
4
7
2
4
16
0
6
6
15
0
4
4
4
0
2
5
7
0
4
6
7
0
4
10
2
3
6
11
0
4
2
3
1
2
3
6
2
4
4
9
2
4
5
0
3
0
7
0
4
0
2
0
2
0
4
1
4
1
4
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
65
2
24
24
69
0
21
10
17
1
10
14
35
8
20
19
31
8
20
THERMAL ENGINEERING
Vol. 62
No. 8
2015
COMPARATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
545
Table 7. Total results of the environmental assessment of different stages of the PI life cycle Environmental assessment, index Stages of the life cycle
wind power installation
Mining
solar power installation
biogas power installation
miniHPP
gas engine generator station
4.1
4.0
4.3
4.2
5.0
Production
10.8
10.2
9.1
13.0
13.1
Operation
2.0
0.0
1.0
8.0
8.0
Utilization
5.9
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.0
Total, point
22.8
19.3
19.4
30.2
31.1
Total, (point kg)/kW
3012
5987
1291
CONCLUSIONS (1) The proposed procedure allows giving the com prehensive assessment of the ecological level of the generating objects functioning on the RES basis. (2) The considered approach to the integrated environmental assessment of RES gives an opportu nity to consider the environmental impact of PI for RES at all stages of the life cycle to the fullest extent possible—from mining to utilization—and it may be used for the adaptation of existing and for the develop ment of new regulations for different types of PI for RES taking into account the impact of the ecological
4932
factor. The procedure is universal and it allows making analysis irrespective of the type of the considered PI. (3) Comparison of the environmental impact given on the basis of the developed procedure revealed the advantages for applying new power engineering tech nologies versus traditional ones. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The work was carried out with the financial support of the Ministry of Education and Science, the Russian Federation (Agreement No. 14.577.21.0098 on Grantinaid extensions dated August 26, 2014, unique project identifier is RFMEFI57714X0098).
Natural resources 1.0
Solar power installation Biogas power installation Wind power installation
0.8 MiniHPP 0.6
GEGS
0.4 0.2 Ecological factor 1.0
0.2 0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
1.0 Electrical power consumption Fig. 5. Integral assessment of the PI life cycle. THERMAL ENGINEERING
Vol. 62
No. 8
2015
1226
Water consumption
546
SOSNINA et al.
REFERENCES 1. Project of the Energy Strategy of Russia for the Period Up to the Year 2035. http://minenergo.gov.ru/documents/ razrabotka/17481.html [in Russian]. 2. Russian Federation State Program Energy Efficiency and Power Industry Development, Approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 321 dated April 15, 2014. 3. V. E. Fortov and O. S. Popel’, “The current status of the development of renewable energy sources world wide and in Russia,” Therm. Eng. 61 (6), 389 (2014). doi: 10.1134/S0040363614060022 4. G. V. Pachurin, O. V. Masleeva, and E. N. Sosnina, Environmental Aspects of Biopower Engineering (LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, Germany, 2012). 5. E. N. Sosnina, O. V. Masleeva, G. V. Pachurin, A. Yu. Kechkin, and N. N. Golovkin, Environmental Problems of Renewable Sources of Energy: (Nizhny Novgorod Gos. Tekhn. Univ., Nizhny Novgorod, 2014) [in Russian]. 6. “Directive 2009/125/EC of 21 October 2009 establish ing a framework for the setting of ecodesign require ments for energyrelated products,” Off. J. Eur. Union 52, L 285/10–L 285/35 (2009). 7. GOST (State Standard) R ISO 140402010: Environ mental Management. Life Cycle Assessment. Principles and Framework (Standardinform, Moscow, 2010) [in Russian]. 8. E. N. Sosnina, O. V. Masleeva, G. V. Pachurin, and E. V. Kryukov, “Environmental assessment of renew able energy sources production process,” Sovr. Probl. Nauki Obr., No. 6, 174–180 (2013). 9. V. G. Sazonov, Planning and Predicting under Market Conditions: A Handbook (TIDOT DVGU, Vladivostok, 2001) [in Russian].
10. G. Ya. Vagin and E. N. Sosnina, Power Supply Systems: An EducationandMethodical Complex, 2nd ed. (Nizhny Novgorod Tekhn. Univ, Nizhny Novgorod, 2012) [in Russian]. 11. A Methodical Handbook for Calculation, Standardiza tion, and Monitoring of Polluting Emissions into the Atmosphere (NII Atmosfery, St. Petersburg, 2012) [in Russian]. 12. I. N. Bereshko and A. V. Betin, Mathematical Models in Ecology. Part 1: A Handbook (Nats. Khark. Aerokosm. Univ., Kharkiv, 2006) [in Ruassian]. 13. Technical Description of the Musson Family of Wind Generators. http://elvision.ru/catalog/visten/vgrt/ vgmus_59.html. 14. The Pr30 Hydraulic Unit Driven by a Propeller Turbine. http://www.inset.ru/r_offers/Pr30.htm. 15. Saana 245260 LM3 MBW SingleCrystal Modules. http://www.multiwood.ru/pv/S245260LM3MBW. 16. Biogas Installations for Agriculture Produced by AO EKOROS Center. http://itkenergo.narod.ru/ Predlogenie1.3.htm. 17. Caterpillar Gas Power Stations: Gas Piston Units of Cat erpillar. http://www.manbw.ru/analitycs/caterpillar.html. 18. A Collection of Specific Indicators Characterizing the Generation of Production and Consumption Wastes. http://www.recyclers.ru/uploads/library/specific_showing. pdf. 19. Aggregated Norms of Water Consumption and Water Removal for Different Industry Branches (Stroiizdat, Moscow, 1978) [in Russian]. 20. A Handbook for Designing Electric Networks, Ed. by D. L. Faibisovich, 4th ed. (ENAS, Moscow, 2012) [in Russian].
Translated by E. Grishina
THERMAL ENGINEERING
Vol. 62
No. 8
2015
