Добірка наукової літератури з теми "R1 energy-efficiency formula"

This article presents an analysis on the use of the R1 formula to determine the recovery status of some energy from waste plants. Detailed R1 computations are provided to demonstrate the application of R1 guidelines in incineration and gasification facilities. Climate and size correction methods are proposed in consideration of the disadvantage faced by smaller-sized energy from waste plants or those located in warmer regions in meeting the set threshold. A key highlight is the case-based application of climate and size correction factors to three case study plants in scaling the R1 value in consideration of external variants. The proposed size and climate correction factors are compared with the climate correction factor defined in the Waste Framework Directive of the European Union. The application of the proposed correction factors lead to conservative R1 scaling when compared with the application of the Waste Framework Directive climate correction factor. The introduction of the size correction factor addresses an important gap in the current Waste Framework Directive.

The assessment of novel waste-to-energy technologies has several drawbacks due to the nature of the R1 formula. The 3T method, which aims to cover this gap, combines thermodynamic parameters in a radar graph and the overall efficiency is calculated from the area of the trapezoid. The present study expands the application of the 3T method in order to make it suitable for utilization in other energy-from-waste technologies. In the framework of this study, a 3T specialized solution is developed for the case of landfilling plus landfill gas recovery, with the potential inclusion of landfill mining. Numerical applications have been performed for waste-to-energy and landfilling by using both the R1 formula and the 3T method. The model Land GEM was used for the calculation of the total landfill gas. The Combined Heat and Power (CHP) efficiency of the landfill gas CHP efficiency was 16.6%–33.1%, and for the waste-to-energy plant, the CHP efficiency was over 70%. The full range of parameters, like metal recovery and quality of CHP, were not fully reflected by the R1 formula, which returned values of 1.07 for waste-to-energy and from 0.37 to 0.63 for different landfilling scenarios. Contrary to that, the 3T method calculated values between 0.091 and 0.307 for the waste-to-energy plant and values between 0.011 and 0.121 for the various landfilling scenarios. The 3T method is able to account for the recovery of materials like metals and assess the quality of the output flows. The 3T method was able to successfully provide a solution for the case of landfilling plus landfill gas recovery, with the potential inclusion of landfill mining, and directly compares the results with the conventional case of waste-to-energy.

Waste-to-energy plants have the peculiarity of being considered both as energy production and as waste destruction facilities and this distinction is important for legislative reasons. The efficiency of waste-to-energy plants must be objective and consistent, independently if the focus is the production of energy, the destruction of waste or the recovery/upgrade of materials. With the introduction of polygeneration technologies, like gasification, the production of energy and the recovery/upgrade of materials, are interconnected. The existing methodology for assessing the efficiency of waste-to-energy plants is the R1 formula, which does not take into consideration the full spectrum of the operations that take place in waste-to-energy plants. This study introduces a novel methodology for assessing the efficiency of waste-to-energy plants and is defined as the 3T method, which stands for ‘trapezoidal thermodynamic technique’. The 3T method is an integrated approach for assessing the efficiency of waste-to-energy plants, which takes into consideration not only the production of energy but also the quality of the products. The value that is returned from the 3T method can be placed in a tertiary diagram and the global efficiency map of waste-to-energy plants can be produced. The application of the 3T method showed that the waste-to-energy plants with high combined heat and power efficiency and high recovery of materials are favoured and these outcomes are in accordance with the cascade principle and with the high cogeneration standards that are set by the EU Energy Efficiency Directive.

Background: Supplement feed with an optimal composition will increase livestock productivity through increased feed digestibility and feed consumption that will provide a balance between amino acid supply and energy to grow, and produce. One of the fishery wastes that can be used as feed supplements is shrimp waste. The purpose of the study was to determine and obtain the level of use of feed supplements of fermented shrimp waste in the ration which resulted in a balance value of protein efficiency and the best egg yolk colour in the native chickens. Materials and Methods: The experiment used 20 native chickens aged 40 weeks in 20-unit cages. The study used the Complete Randomized Design method with 5 kinds of treatment, namely R0 (ration without the use of feed supplement fermentation of shrimp waste), R1 (ration with the use of feed supplement 0.5% fermentation of shrimp waste), R2 (ration with the use of feed supplement 1.0% fermentation of shrimp waste), R3 (ration with the use of feed supplement 1.5% fermentation of shrimp waste), and R4 (ration with the use of feed supplement 2.0% fermentation of shrimp waste), each treatment is repeated four times. The changes observed were ration consumption, protein consumption, egg weight, protein efficiency balance, and yolk colour. Results: Shrimp waste fermentation products as feed supplements have a significant influence (P<0.05) on feed consumption, protein consumption, egg weight, the balance of protein efficiency, and the colour of the yolk. The use of shrimp waste fermentation products gives optimal results at the rate of 1.5% (R3) in the ration against feed consumption and protein consumption, the weight of eggs optimal results at the level of 2.0 % (R4), and the balance of protein efficiency and against the colour of the yolk optimal results at the level of 1.0% (R2). Conclusions: The use of shrimp waste fermentation products of 1.0 levels in the ration results in an optimal balance of protein efficiency and yolk colour. The pattern of the relationship between treatments to the balance of protein efficiency is obtained in linear form with the equation y = 0.1494x + 3.7593 (R2 =93.71%). and in the colour of the yolk in linear form with the equation y = 0.85x + 7.4883 (R2=96.33%). Shrimp waste fermentation products can be used at a rate of 1.0-2.0% in the feed formula of the local poultry layer phase and livestock other than local poultry.

Energy from Waste (EfW) is increasingly becoming an essential part of the contemporary mix of sustainable energy systems. EfW technologies consist of waste treatment processes that create energy in the form of electricity, heat or transport fuels (e.g. diesel) from a waste source. There exists a global movement towards reduction of dependence on fossil fuels and focus on exploiting renewable energy resources. Waste is available in abundance and recent studies only suggest an increasing tonnage of waste with a growing global population and diverse industries. Thermal treatment of waste has been around for over a century, with the first incinerator built in Great Britain. The social acceptance of an EfW facility has come a long way since then, with a conscious shift away from a waste landfill as a feasible solution. Generating usable EfW resources, which would otherwise go to landfill, has unquestionable environmental and economic benefits. With a large number of waste disposal operations, establishing itself amongst key solutions as part of waste management in European cities, an efficiency scaling method was developed by the European Commission to incentivize energy recovery operations. This essentially differentiates between waste disposal and energy recovery operation. The efficiency scaling method, known as R1 thermal efficiency, has been adopted by Australian Environment Protection Agencies as well. The R1 energy-efficiency formula is widely used in the assessment of the thermal energy efficiency of an EfW facility. The R1 metric amongst other efficiency indicators is a means to assess the overall useful energy extraction process from waste. This thesis addresses potential gaps that exist in the R1 formula, particularly addressing a bias in the formula towards EfW plants of larger capacity and located in cooler climate zones. An analysis on the use of the R1 formula is presented to determine the recovery status of some EfW plants. Detailed R1 computations are provided to demonstrate the application of R1 guidelines to specific EfW technologies, incineration and gasification. The study proposes the application of climate and size correction methods in consideration of the disadvantage faced by smaller-sized EfW plants or those located in warmer regions in meeting the set threshold. A key highlight is the case based application of external variants, climate and size correction factors to EfW plants in different locations in Europe, in scaling the R1 value. The proposed size and climate correction factors are compared with the Climate Correction Factor (CCF) defined in the Waste Framework Directive (WFD) of the European Union. The application of the proposed correction factors lead to conservative R1 scaling when compared with the application of the WFD CCF. The introduction of the size correction factor addresses an important gap in the current WFD. Combined heat and power (CHP) modes of EfW plants have proven to be more efficient, given there is substantial demand of thermal energy. The research analyses CHP modes and relates the outcome to the R1 criterion for the select case studies. The work is novel and the proposed analytical model makes significant contributions to knowledge by demonstrating the impacts of external variants on the outcome of R1 thermal efficiency of EfW plants. The proposed calculation tool would enable engineers, site managers, system auditors with a methodology that can be applied for the initial assessment of R1 thermal efficiency of an EfW. The comparative analysis with European WFD formula and CHP mode provides a broader spectrum to gauge the efficiency of an EfW facility. A follow-on benefit of this work is the fact that it would enable a predictive assessment on a proposed EfW facility and hence assist in addressing concerns of environmental groups.

A CO2-evaluation is made for landfill and Waste-to-Energy (WtE) concepts. Different concepts are identified and compared for their performance on energy and materials recovery. Performance indicators for WtE are compared; like energy efficiency, EXergy efficiency, the R1-D10 formula from the EU Waste Framework directive, and CO2-emission and avoidance. It is shown that, due to the biomass content and the avoidance effect due to the recovery of energy and materials, conventional WtE has a near zero CO2-emission per ton of waste. Optimised WtE can have a significant negative overall emission of 200–300 kgCO2/ton of waste. This means an absolute net avoidance of CO2 by WtE. The reduction relative to land filling is as much as 500–1200 kgCO2/ton of waste. The potential for optimisation of the energy recovery as well as the material recovery of the WtE infrastructure is demonstrated. If WtE is evaluated as a power plant, an optimised plant can have an emission of only 0,336 kgCO2/kWh, lower than a gas fired electrical power plant, and this absolute figure does not include the avoided landfill emissions. With CHP this can be reduced even further. The actual potential of electricity production from WtE for the EU-15 is calculated to be over 7,5% of total electricity production. Additionally heat and the metal recoveries could be doubled.