Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 18, pp 18484–18492 | Cite as

A streamlined life cycle assessment of a coal-fired power plant: the South African case study

  • Israel Dunmade
  • Nkosinathi Madushele
  • Paul A. AdedejiEmail author
  • Esther T. Akinlabi
Research Article
  • 42 Downloads

Abstract

Non-renewable energy sources have detrimental environmental effects, which directly and indirectly affect the biosphere as environmental deposits from their use for energy generation exceed a threshold. This study performs a streamlined life cycle assessment (LCA) of a coal-fired plant in South Africa. The cradle-to-grave LCA focuses on the coal cycle to determine hotspots with high environmental impacts in the process. Four impact categories were considered in this study: global warming potential, photochemical ozone creation potential, eutrophication potential, and acidification potential. Coal transportation, coal pulverization, water use, and ash management were identified as hotspots in the coal cycle. The coal process has 95% potential for global warming, 4% potential for eutrophication, 1% potential for acidification, and a negligible percentage for photochemical ozone creation. Susceptibility to climate change, eutrophication, acid rain, soil degradation, and water contamination among others are major concerns of the coal cycle. Outsourcing coal from nearby mines with train as medium of transportation reduces environmental impact. Similarly, the use of mitigation technologies like flue gas desulphurization, carbon capture storage, or selective catalytic reduction will reduce the concentration of the flue gas emitted. Ultimately, substituting the coal process with renewable energy sources will ensure environmental sustainability in South Africa. This study will serve as a good resource for further studies on LCA of coal power plants not only in other African countries but in other developing countries with similar situation.

Keywords

Coal cycle Coal-fired power plant Environmental sustainability Life cycle assessment South Africa 

Notes

References

  1. Bhowmick MS, Bera SC (2008) Study of performance of induced draught (ID) fan through DCS based instrumentation and control system of a high capacity boiler and design of new induced draught fan for the efficiency improvement of a steam generation plant, in: IEEE Region 10 Colloquium and the Third ICIIS,.December 8–10, Kharagpur, India, 1–13.Google Scholar
  2. Candice S, Mathe T, Hart A, van Heerden C (2014) Large scale Implementation of WFGD in Eskom : the Medupi Power Station WFGD Plant Retrofit Project, in: FFF Annual Waterberg Conference, October, 15–16.Google Scholar
  3. Cherubini F, Bird ND, Cowie A, Jungmeier G, Shlamadinger B, Woess-Gallasch S (2009) Energy- and greenhouse gas-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: key issues, ranges and recommendations. Resour Conserv Recycl 53:434–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Curran MA (2012) Life Cycle Assessment Handbook: A Guide for Environmentally Sustainable Products. John Wiley & Sons and Scrivener Publishing LCC.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118528372
  5. Dai W, Dong J, Yan W, Xu J (2017) Study on each phase characteristics of the whole coal life cycle and their ecological risk assessment — a case of coal in China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:1296–1305.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7808-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dunmade I (2012) Recycle or dispose off? Lifecycle environmental sustainability assessment of paint recycling process. Resour Environ 2:291–296.  https://doi.org/10.5923/j.re.20120206.07 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dunmade I (2013) Environmental profile assessment of a plastic framed tambourine musical instrument – a lifecycle approach. Resour Environ 3:129–134.  https://doi.org/10.5923/j.re.20130305.03 Google Scholar
  8. Dunmade I (2014) Lifecycle assessment of a stapling machine. Int J Eng Technol 4:12.  https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v4i1.3813 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Evans A, Strezov V, Evans TJ (2009) Assessment of sustainability indicators for renewable energy technologies. Renew Sust Energ Rev 13:1082–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. FAO (2017) The future of food and agriculture-Trends and challenges, Rome. https://doi.org/ISBN 978-92-5-109551-5
  11. Guinée JB (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment: Operational guide to the ISO Standards, Eco-efficiency in Industry and Science Series. Kluwer Adademic Publishers, Dordrecht.  https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48055-7
  12. IEA (2010) Power generation from coal: Measuring and reporting efficiency performance and CO2 emissions, International Energy Agency.Google Scholar
  13. IEA (2015) World Energy Outlook 2015, International Energy Agency.  https://doi.org/10.1787/weo-2015-en
  14. IEA (2018) Global energy and CO2 status report 2017, International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/GECO2017.pdf
  15. ISO (2006) ISO 14040-Environmental management - life cycle assessment - principles and framework, International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
  16. ISO/DIS (1997) Environmental management-life cycle assessment-part principles and framework. http://www.cscses.com/uploads/2016328/20160328110518251825.pdf
  17. Jensen, AA (1998) Life cycle assessment (LCA): a guide to approaches, experiences and information sources. Copenhagen, Denmark: European Environment AgencyGoogle Scholar
  18. Karmakar S, Kolar AK (2013) Thermodynamic analysis of high-ash coal-fired power plant with carbon dioxide capture. Int J Energy Res 37:522–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koornneef J, Faaij A, Turkenburg W (2008) The screening and scoping of environmental impact assessment and strategic environmental assessment of carbon capture and storage in the Netherlands. Environ Impact Assess Rev 28:392–414.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2007.08.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lerche H, Gagnon L, Saur I, Jørgen O (2011) Life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the generation of wind and hydro power. Renew Sust Energ Rev 15:3417–3422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liang X, Wang Z, Zhou Z, Huang Z, Zhou J, Cen K (2013) Up-to-date life cycle assessment and comparison study of clean coal power generation technologies in China. J Clean Prod 39:24–31.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.08.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Madushele N, Adedeji PA (2019) Plausibility of assessing environmental impacts of a domestic biogas digester in the design stage. Environmental Progress Sustainable Energy.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.13228
  23. Makgato SS, Chirwa EMN (2017) Characteristics of thermal coal used by power plants in Waterberg region of South Africa. Chem Eng Trans 57:511–516.  https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1757086 Google Scholar
  24. Mangena SJ, Brent AC (2006) Application of a life cycle impact assessment framework to evaluate and compare environmental performances with economic values of supplied coal products. J Clean Prod 14:1071–1084.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.04.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mbohwa C (2013) Life cycle assessment of a coal-fired old thermal power plant. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering, Vol. I, WCE, 2013, July, 3–5, 2013, London, U.K.Google Scholar
  26. Mittal ML (2010) Estimates of emissions from coal fired thermal power plants in India. Dep Environ Occup Heal 39:1–22Google Scholar
  27. Petrescu L, Bonalumi D, Valenti G, Cormos AM, Cormos CC (2017) Life cycle assessment for supercritical pulverized coal power plants with post-combustion carbon capture and storage. J Clean Prod 157:10–21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.225 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Prevost XM (2004) SA coal reserves, After the Act, in: 10th Southern African Conference on Coal Science and Technology, November, 10–12, 2004, Indaba Hotel, Fourways, Randburg, Gauteng.Google Scholar
  29. Rathnayake M, Julnipitawong P, Tangtermsirikul S (2018) Utilization of coal fly ash and bottom ash as solid sorbents for sulfur dioxide reduction from coal fired power plant: life cycle assessment and applications. J Clean Prod 202:934–945.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.204 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Raubenheimer S (2011) Facing climate change: Building South Africa's strategy, Unity Press, Cape Town.  https://doi.org/10.15713/ins.mmj.3
  31. Singh U, Rao AB (2014a) Prospects of carbon capture and storage (CCS) for new coal power plants in India, in: 1st National Conference on Advances in Thermal Engineering, Indian School of Mines Dhanbad. pp. 165–174.Google Scholar
  32. Singh U, Rao AB (2014b) Estimating the environmental implications of implementing carbon capture and storage in Indian coal power plants. 2014 Int. Conf. Adv. Green Energy, ICAGE 2014:226–232.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAGE.2014.7050169 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Singh U, Rao AB (2015) Integrating SO2 and NOx control systems in Indian coal-fired power plants. Decision 42:191–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Singh U, Sharma N, Sankar S (2016) Environmental life cycle assessment of Indian coal-fired power plants. Int J Coal Sci Technol 3:215–225.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40789-016-0136-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sloss LL (2015) Assessing and managing spontaneous combustion of coal, IEA Clean Coal Centre, London, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  36. Tang L, Yokoyama T, Kubota H, Shimota A (2014) Life cycle assessment of a pulverized coal-fired power plant with CCS technology in japan. Energy Procedia 63:7437–7443.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.780 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Thopil GA, Pouris A (2015) Aggregation and internalisation of electricity externalities in South Africa. Energy 82:501–511.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.01.059 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang J, Qin Q, Bai Z (2018a) Characterizing the effects of opencast coal-mining and land reclamation on soil macropore distribution characteristics using 3D CT scanning. Catena 171:212–221.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2018.07.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang J, Wang R, Zhu Y, Li J (2018b) Life cycle assessment and environmental cost accounting of coal-fired power generation in China. Energy Policy 115:374–384.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.01.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Winkler H (2009) Cleaner energy, cooler climate: Developing sustainable energy solutions for South Africa. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.12.015
  41. Wu X, Wu K, Zhang Y, Hong Q, Zheng C, Gao X, Cen K (2017) Comparative life cycle assessment and economic analysis of typical flue-gas cleaning processes of coal-fired power plants in China. J Clean Prod 142:3236–3242.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.146 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wu XD, Guo JL, Chen GQ (2018) The striking amount of carbon emissions by the construction stage of coal-fired power generation system in China. Energy Policy 117:358–369.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.02.043 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhang L, Wang J, Feng Y (2018) Life cycle assessment of opencast coal mine production: a case study in Yimin mining area in China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:8475–8486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zhao S, Duan Y, Li Y, Liu M, Lu J, Ding Y, Gu X, Tao J, Du M (2018) Emission characteristic and transformation mechanism of hazardous trace elements in a coal-fired power plant. Fuel 214:597–606.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.09.093 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mount Royal University CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical Engineering ScienceUniversity of JohannesburgJohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations