Mirza Arsyad
ABSTRACT
Global electricity is mainly supplied by coal as the main fuel, representing about 40%. Even the renewable energy portion is increasing in a developing country. Coal is still the majority as the main fuel of power plant because of abundant availability and low price that makes energy production cost becomes cheap. Besides its advantages, coal also contributes most of the emissions from the power generation sector. The International Energy Agency (IEA) states that in 2019 emissions of electricity sector contribute to 33% of the global sulfur dioxide (SO2), 14% of the nitrogen oxides (NOx), and 5% particulate matter 2.5 (PM2.5). Coal-fired power plants generate 75% of SO2, 70% of NOx, and over 90% of its PM2.5 emissions. The implementation of Life cycle assessment in this research contained in ISO-14040 and ISO-14044. The four LCA steps are goal and scope definition, life cycle inventory (LCI) analysis, life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), and interpretation. One of the typical LCA gate to gate LCA method is used to calculate the global warming potential and acidification potential with the parameter of ton CO2-eq/ GWh and ton-SO2 eq/ GWh. The object of this research is emphasized in the study on one of the biggest coal power plants in Indonesia with unit size 300 MW, which are using medium calory coal for its fuel. The result is the power plant global warming potential is 800-ton CO2 eq/ GWh and Acidification Potential (AP) is 0.6-ton SO2 eq/ GWh. The novelty in this research was to create a database of emissions per electricity produce from a coal power plant in Indonesia. From the database, people can clearly understand the condition of energy production of coal power plant in Indonesia and comparing with another coal power plant in the world.
- Comparison of Energy Systems Using Life Cycle Assessment Copyright World Energy Council, 2004, ISBN 0 946121 16 8Google Scholar
- Indonesia's Electricity Supply Business Plan (RUPTL) 2019-2028Google Scholar
- Indonesia Center of Environment Law "INDONESIA'S COAL POWER EMISSION NORMS LESSONS FROM INDIA AND CHINA. 2017Google Scholar
- IPCC. Global Warming of 1.5 °C. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeSwitzerland; 2018.Google Scholar
- Springer International Publishing AG 2018 M.Z. Hauschild et al. (eds.), Life Cycle Assessment, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_3Google Scholar
- Hanak DP, Kolios AJ, Biliyok C, Manovic V. Probabilistic performance assessment of a coal-fired power plant. Appl Energy 2015;139:350--64.Google Scholar
- ISO. BS EN ISO 14040:2006. Environmental management life cycle assessment principles and framework; 2006.Google Scholar
- ISO. BS EN ISO 14044:2006. Environmental management life cycle assessment requirements and guidelines; 2006.Google Scholar
- Hussain D, Dzombak DA, Jaramillo P, Lowry GV. Comparative lifecycle inventory (LCI) of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) methods using different CO2 sources. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 2013; 16: 129--44Google Scholar
- Company Annual Report 2018Google Scholar
- Company Statistic Report 2018Google Scholar
- Fuss S, Canadell JG, Peters GP, Tavoni M, Andrew RM, Ciais P, et al. Betting on negative emissions. Nat Clim Change 2014;4:850--3.Google Scholar
- Company Statistic Report 2019Google Scholar
- http://www.aresasialtd.com/en/our-business/coal-trading/glossary.htmlGoogle Scholar
- United States Environmental Protection Agency "Understanding Global Warming Potential" 2018Google Scholar
- World energy Council COMPARISON OF ENERGY SYSTEMS USING LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2004Google Scholar
- Haselbach L, Langfitt Q. LCA Learning Moduls Series, Washington State University,2015.Google Scholar
- World Nuclear Association Comparison of Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Electricity Generation Sources 2018Google Scholar
- Gunkaya Z, et al. Environmental Performance of Electricity Generation Based on Resources: A Life Cycle Assessment CaseStudy in Turkey. 2016Google Scholar
- Bo Yang, et al. Life cycle environmental impact assessment of fuel mix-based biomass co-firing plants with CO2 capture and storage. 2019Google Scholar
- WCA. Driving CCUS deployment: The pathway to zero emissions from coal. Word Coal Association; 2018.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Gate to Gate Life Cycle Assessment Coal Power Plant in Indonesia
Recommendations
Energy and environmental advantages of cogeneration with nuclear and coal electrical utilities
EE'09: Proceedings of the 4th IASME/WSEAS international conference on Energy & environmentThe use of electrical-utility cogeneration from nuclear energy and coal is examined for improving regional energy-resource utilization efficiency and environmental performance. A case study is presented for a large and diverse hypothetical region which ...
Quantitative assessment and mitigation strategies of greenhouse gas emissions from rice fields in China: A data-driven approach based on machine learning and statistical modeling
Graphical abstractDisplay Omitted
Highlights- Machine learning models accurately predict the GHG emissions from rice fields.
- ...
AbstractThe accurate prediction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from paddy fields is critical for developing mitigation strategies to reduce emissions, while realizing the large-scale prediction of GHG emissions from paddy fields remains to ...
Environmental Emissions Assessment of Coal and Refuse Derived Fuel Incineration Processes by Simulation
IEEA '18: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Informatics, Environment, Energy and ApplicationsCoal has been the predominant source of energy for electricity production in South Africa. Coal combustion process for energy recovery is regarded as heavy pollutant emissions process. Waste derived alternative fuels are widely used for substituting the ...
Comments