当前位置: X-MOL 学术J. Clean. Prod. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Assessing decarbonisation pathways in the food and beverage sector: A multi-criteria decision analysis approach
Journal of Cleaner Production ( IF 11.1 ) Pub Date : 2022-08-12 , DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133534
Richard O'Shea , Richen Lin , David M. Wall , Jerry D. Murphy

Decarbonisation pathways for the food and beverage sector are focused at a national, regional, or sectoral level. There is a lack of literature which assesses decarbonisation pathways at a facility level and which compares pathways using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). This work assesses the economic and environmental performance of 21 decarbonisation pathways which could be implemented at a facility in the food and beverage sector using 5 MCDA methods. Four sets of criteria weights (equal criteria weights, economic focus, environmental focus, and subjective weights of facility management) are applied to compare the results obtained.

The best pathway (Pathway no. 15: Boiler–combined heat and power, organic Rankine cycle (CHP ORC) – mechanical vapour recompression (MVR)) for equal criteria weights or an economic focus achieves the best net present value, reduces emissions by 43%, has the shortest payback period, and the lowest levelised cost of abatement. Pathway no. 14 (38 kV – MVR – biogas) (recommended for an environmental focus) enables a 100% reduction in GHG emissions but achieves the third worst net present value. Pathway no. 20 (Boiler – CHP ORC – MVR – Biogas) is recommended when using subjective weights and has the best levelised cost of abatement for any pathway that reduces emissions by 100%. However, pathway no. 20 has a negative net present value, a payback period greater than 20 years, and a high CAPEX spend per mass of tCO2eq saved. To achieve GHG emissions savings greater than 67%, biogas from the anaerobic digestion of distillery feed products is required.



中文翻译:

评估食品和饮料行业的脱碳途径:多标准决策分析方法

食品和饮料行业的脱碳途径主要集中在国家、地区或部门层面。缺乏在设施层面评估脱碳途径以及使用多标准决策分析 (MCDA) 比较途径的文献。这项工作评估了 21 种脱碳途径的经济和环境绩效,这些途径可以使用 5 种 MCDA 方法在食品和饮料行业的设施中实施。应用四组标准权重(相等的标准权重、经济重点、环境重点和设施管理的主观权重)来比较获得的结果。

相同标准权重或经济重点的最佳途径(途径 15:锅炉热电联产、有机朗肯循环 (CHP ORC) - 机械蒸汽再压缩(MVR))实现最佳净现值,减少 43 排放%,具有最短的投资回收期和最低的平准化减排成本。途径编号 14(38 kV – MVR – 沼气)(推荐用于环境重点)可减少 100%温室气体排放量,但达到了第三差的净现值。途径编号 20(锅炉 – CHP ORC – MVR – 沼气)在使用主观权重时被推荐,并且对于任何减少 100% 排放的途径而言,它具有最佳的平均减排成本。然而,途径没有。20 的净现值为负,投资回收期大于 20 年,每节省大量 tCO 2 eq 的 CAPEX 支出较高。为了实现 67% 以上的温室气体减排,需要对酒厂饲料产品进行厌氧消化产生沼气。

更新日期:2022-08-12
down
wechat
bug