This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ISO/DIS 19694-5 Stationary source emissions — Determination of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in energy-intensive industries —
As a key product for environmental applications (e.g. drinking water treatment, flue gas cleaning, waste water treatment)
As an essential mineral product, but often unseen (e.g. toothpaste, sugar)
4
Lime, an enabler for downstream industries
5
Lime functionalities
6
Why a GHG standard?
To support the on-going work of the lime sector to reduce GHG emissions by:
1. Facilitating the measurement, testing and quantifying of GHG emissions from lime manufacturing
2. Facilitating the comparison of GHG emissions performance of a lime manufacturing plants over time
3. Facilitating performance comparisons between lime manufacturing plants with different installation configurations but producing comparable products
7
CEN TC 346 WG 33
ISO/DIS 19694-5
ISO/DIS 19694-1
EuLA “mirror” group with 30 experts
8
Lime production - calcination
CaCO3 + energy CaO + CO2calcium lime carbon
carbonate dioxide
100 g 56 g 44 g
Process CO2
Combustion CO2
9
Lime production process
10
Lime production process
11
Manufacture of lime - fuel mix
12
Manufacture of lime - Average share of GHG emissions
13
Lime GHG issues considered
• Range of kiln types• Range of capacities of plant• Range of lime products and qualities
- High calcium lime- Dolomitic lime
• Range of fuel types- Fossil (solid, liquid and gas)- Mixed fossil and biomass- Biomass
• Potential GHGs- CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6, PFCs, HFCs
• Plants that import kiln stone• Plants that manufacture non-kiln stone aggregates• Plants that have on-site electricity generation• Plants that manufacture downstream products
- Downstream lime products- Other downstream products
• Ability to separately compare performance of quarry, kiln and downstream operations
14
Kiln stone preparation
Kiln process Combustion
CO2 (Fuels)
Fuels
Electricity
Process CO2
Downstream processing
Fuels
Electricity
Electricity
Lime GHG system boundaries
Scope 1Direct emissions including extraction, quarry operations, transport to stone processing plant, processing (washing, crushing, screening), transport to the lime kiln
Scope 2Indirect emissions including extraction, quarry operations including quarry dewatering, transport to stone processing plant, processing (washing, crushing, screening), transport to the lime kiln
Scope 3Includes imported kiln stone extraction, quarry operations including quarry dewatering, transport to stone processing plant, processing (washing, crushing, screening), transport to the lime kiln
Fuels & Electricity
Scope 1
Direct emissions from the manufacture of lime
Direct emissions from the production of LKD
Direct emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels
Scope 2 Indirect emissions from kiln operation and infrastructure
Scope 1 Direct emissions including transport to silos, grinding/milling, hydrating or packing
Scope 2 Indirect emissions including transport to silos, grinding/milling, hydrating or packing
• Determine CO2e emissions and measure uncertainty
Verification test methodology
20
Verification test resultsPl
ant A
Plan
t B
Round 1 Round 2
21
• Findings from Round 1• Mass-balance-based method provided a reliable measure of GHG emissions with
relatively low uncertainty
• Question about collection of all ROK in output method – due to hang ups in silo
• Unrepresentative measurement of stack gas flow
• Check representative measurement of CO2 content using FTIR
• Check low detection of methane <0.2% of total CO2e
• Detection limits for some non-CO2 GHG with high Global Warming Potentials
• Improvements for Round 2• Ensure product silos are empty before test start and fully cleared following test completion
• Improve flow measurement position and increase frequency of measurement
• Include measurement of CO2 by non dispersive IR (EN 15058) as well as FTIR
• Include measurement of total VOCs (EN 12619) to confirm methane measurement
• Extend sampling periods for non-CO2 GHG (PFCs & HFCs) to reduce detection limits
Verification test development
22
±23%
Plant A verification test resultsComparison of methods
±19.5% ±30.4%
±1.4% ±1.7%±1.0% ±1.2%
23
Plant B verification test resultsComparison of methods
±1.9% ±1.9% ±2.4% ±2.6%
±15.3% ±20.5%
24
Verification test conclusions
• The draft standard was found to satisfy the requirements for Accuracy, Transparency, Consistency, Relevance, Completeness and practicality
• The mass-balance-based input and output methods are workable, produce results in close agreement and have reasonable levels of uncertainty, especially if conducted over 12 months
• The suitability of the stack measurement method is primarily dependent on the ability to make a representative measurement of the carbon dioxide content of the exhaust gas and is especially sensitive to its flow rate
• The stack measurement method requires sophisticated equipment, a high degree of maintenance and often significant changes to the configuration of the flue gas pipes
• The verification tests show that the stack measurement method is likely to be subject to greater uncertainty than the calculation-based methods. For stack measurement compliance with reasonable uncertainty levels is likely to remain a challenge even when permanent measurement systems are optimised for plant characteristics
• Excluding the non-CO2 GHGs, does not have a significant impact on the completeness of the overall determination of GHGs
2525
Thank you !
Martyn Kenny, Sustainability director (Lafarge Tarmac)Julien Coubronne, Environmental and industrial adviser (EuLA)
26
Stack emissions test methods – Round 1
27
Stack emissions test methods – Round 2
EN 15259 Stationary source emissions – Requirements for the measurement sections and sites and for the measurement objective, plan and report