4.6 Article

Investigating a Retrofit Thermal Power Plant from a Sustainable Environment Perspective-A Fuel Lifecycle Assessment Case Study

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 14, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su14084556

Keywords

atmospheric emissions; greenhouse gases; air pollution; LCA; lifecycle assessment; thermal power plant; natural gas

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Retrofitting thermal power plants is a valuable opportunity for sustainable electricity generation in Taiwan. A case study on an existing power plant near decommissioning was conducted to explore fuel source options for the retrofit and evaluate their impact on lifecycle atmospheric emissions. The study found that gas-fired electricity, even after considering liquefaction and regasification processes, has significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions compared to coal or fuel oil. It also concluded that selecting natural gas for thermal power generation can simultaneously achieve the co-benefit of reducing air pollution.
Retrofitting thermal power plants is a valuable opportunity to guide Taiwan's electricity generation towards sustainability. Using an existing power plant nearing decommissioning as a case study, we hypothesized about fuel source options for retrofitting the power plant and compared the resulting impact on lifecycle atmospheric emissions. Our use of the lifecycle assessment (LCA) methodology reflected Taiwan's heavy reliance on the imports and shipping of primary energy sources. We found that after accounting for the contribution of liquefaction and regasification (17%), gas-fired electricity still has significantly lower lifecycle greenhouse gases (GHGs) than coal or fuel oil (FO). In addition, we found that if natural gas (NG) is selected to achieve the greenhouse gas reduction of thermal power, the co-benefit of air pollution reduction can also be achieved at the same time.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available