Comparative life cycle assessment of plasma-based and traditional exhaust gas treatment technologies
Inga Stasiulaitiene,Dainius Martuzevicius,Vytautas Abromaitis,Martynas Tichonovas,Jonas Baltrusaitis,Ronny Brandenburg,Andrzej Pawelec,Alexander Schwock
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.062
IF: 11.1
2016-01-01
Journal of Cleaner Production
Abstract:The emissions of airborne contaminants from various industrial processes are an important source of air pollution and presents problems for human health and the environment in general. The removal of gaseous pollutants, such of nitrogen and sulphur oxides (NOx and SOx), from exhaust gases, or volatile organic compounds (VOC) emitted from various industrial processes is of continuous challenge in the environmental engineering. Plasma-based pollutant decomposition methods emerge as promising techniques, but little is known about their overall environmental performance. We compared two plasma based technologies (Electron Beam Flue Gas Treatment (EBFGT) and Dielectric Barrier Discharge (DBD) against the conventional methods (Wet Flue Gas Desulphurization with Selective Catalytic Reduction, WFGD+SCR, biofiltration and adsorption) using life cycle analysis (LCA), which took into account the usage of materials, waste generation and energy consumption. Five main categories (Global Warming, Ozone Layer Depletion, Acidification, Euthrophication and Human Toxicity, based on the CML2001 method) were used for the environmental impact evaluation. Based on CML2001 IKP Experts weighting, WFGD+SCR technology is marginally more environmentally friendly in comparison to EBFGT (59.25 to 73.74 CML2001 IKP Experts score). The generation of byproducts (in this case gypsum waste) is the main disadvantage of the WFGD+SCR. At the same time, EBFGT enables formation of useful byproducts, which are suitable to be utilized as fertilizers in the agriculture sector. On the other hand, DBD was six times more favorable to the environment than the adsorbtion and more than two times more environmentally friendly than the biofiltration technology (4.23, 27.78 and 9.29 relative units, respectively). With respect to the adsorption/thermal incineration of VOCs, both the electricity and the material consumption, as well as the management of byproducts caused the highest impact. In case of biofiltration, the management of remaining filter material waste (in this case, landfilling) was the most significant. Relatively high electrical energy demand causes lower positioning of plasma based technologies in cases where no other materials are utilized and major waste is formed. In turn, many traditional end-of pipe technologies are associated with high amounts of process waste, which provides plasma technologies with an opportunity to establish them in the market as more efficient and in many occasions, more environment-friendly ones.
environmental sciences,green & sustainable science & technology,engineering, environmental