Life Cycle Assessment of Primary Aluminum Production

被引:0
|
作者
Lian, Xuan [1 ,2 ]
Gao, Hanchen [1 ]
Shen, Leiting [1 ]
Yu, Yilan [3 ]
Wang, Yilin [1 ]
Peng, Zhihong [1 ]
机构
[1] Cent South Univ, Sch Met & Environm, Changsha 410083, Peoples R China
[2] Cent South Univ, Sch Automat, Changsha 410083, Peoples R China
[3] Ctr High Pressure Sci & Technol Adv Res, Shanghai 201203, Peoples R China
基金
国家重点研发计划;
关键词
life cycle assessment; bauxite mining; alumina production; aluminum electrolysis; energy conservation; emission reduction; ANODE; ASH;
D O I
10.3390/pr13020419
中图分类号
TQ [化学工业];
学科分类号
0817 ;
摘要
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is used to quantitatively analyze the energy consumption and environmental impact of primary aluminum production in China, the United States, and Europe, as well as global average. The results indicate that electricity and fuel contribute more than 60% of the environmental impact of bauxite mining; steam is the greatest contributor to the environmental impact of alumina production by the Bayer process, with a result exceeding 35%; and electricity contributes >50% of the environmental impact of aluminum electrolysis. The environmental impact of primary aluminum production in China is 1.2 times the global average. The contributions of the three stages of primary aluminum production to the total environmental impact of the process in China are, in descending order, aluminum electrolysis (64.33%), alumina production (33.09%), and bauxite mining (2.58%). If the proportion of thermal power in the electricity source structure is reduced from 60% to 0%, the contribution of electricity to the environmental impact of primary aluminum production will decrease from 38% to 2%, and the total environmental impact will decrease by 73%. Therefore, energy conservation and emissions reduction can be realized through the optimization of the power generation structure, adoption of clean energy production, and improvement of the heat utilization rate in production processes.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Life cycle assessment of pasta production in Italy
    Bevilacqua, Maurizio
    Braglia, Marcello
    Carmignani, Gionata
    Zammori, Francesco Aldo
    JOURNAL OF FOOD QUALITY, 2007, 30 (06) : 932 - 952
  • [22] Life cycle assessment of bacterial cellulose production
    Forte, Ana
    Dourado, Fernando
    Mota, Andre
    Neto, Belmira
    Gama, Miguel
    Ferreira, Eugenio Campos
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2021, 26 (05): : 864 - 878
  • [23] Life cycle assessment of gold production in China
    Chen, Wei
    Geng, Yong
    Hong, Jinglan
    Dong, Huijuan
    Cui, Xiaowei
    Sun, Mingxing
    Zhang, Qiang
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2018, 179 : 143 - 150
  • [24] LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF THE STRAW MUSHROOM PRODUCTION
    Usubharatana, P.
    Phungrassami, H.
    APPLIED ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, 2016, 14 (01): : 189 - 200
  • [25] Life cycle assessment of Milk production in India
    Rakesh Saxena
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2002, 7 (3) : 189 - 190
  • [26] Life cycle assessment of soybean oil production
    Li, Yong
    Griffing, Evan
    Higgins, Matthew
    Overcash, Michael
    JOURNAL OF FOOD PROCESS ENGINEERING, 2006, 29 (04) : 429 - 445
  • [27] Life Cycle Assessment of multiyear peach production
    Vinyes, Elisabet
    Gasol, Caries M.
    Asin, Luis
    Alegre, Simo
    Munoz, Pere
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2015, 104 : 68 - 79
  • [28] Life cycle assessment of bacterial cellulose production
    Ana Forte
    Fernando Dourado
    André Mota
    Belmira Neto
    Miguel Gama
    Eugénio Campos Ferreira
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2021, 26 : 864 - 878
  • [29] Life cycle assessment of β-Galactosidase enzyme production
    Feijoo, S.
    Gonzalez-Garcia, S.
    Lema, J. M.
    Moreira, M. T.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2017, 165 : 204 - 212
  • [30] Life cycle assessment of carnation production in Greece
    Abeliotis, Konstadinos
    Bar, Sofia-Anna
    Detsis, Vassilis
    Malindretos, George
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2016, 112 : 32 - 38