Best available techniques assessment for coal gasification to promote cleaner production based on the ELECTRE-II method

Abstract Coal-To-Methanol is a key component in the coal chemical industry and methanol production, as well as large source of pollutants, mainly Chemical Oxygen Demand and Sulphur Dioxide. As a general technique and basis of follow-up processes in the coal chemical industry, selection and assessment of coal gasification techniques plays a crucial role in pollution control and cleaner production. This study explores the best available techniques for cleaner coal gasification production based on the ELECTRE-II method—a widely-used outranking method for multi-criteria decision making. Taking technical features, applicability, environmental and economic benefits into consideration, Gaskombinat Schwarze Pumpe, Shell, opposed multiple burner, Texaco, and atmospheric gasification were selected as the best available techniques from 10 coal gasification techniques. Based on these results, newly-built large-scale Coal-To-Methanol enterprises should select Gaskombinat Schwarze Pumpe. Medium-scale and non-recurring investment limited enterprises should adopt opposed multiple burner or Texaco. Shell is recommended for use in urban gas and thermal power plants. For former small-scale fixed-bed Coal-To-Methanol (or polygeneration) enterprises, atmospheric gasification is recommended to transform conditional fixed-bed gasification technologies. We conclude that the ELECTRE-II method is suitable for assessing coal gasification techniques and identify mature, environmental-friendly, and well-adaptable coal techniques with low construction investment, low running costs, intensive capacity of single-furnace gasification and high automation as best available techniques. This study provides a scientific reference for enterprise managers to choose appropriate coal-to-methanol techniques. Moreover, the introduced index system and the detailed procedure for selecting best available techniques serve as a basis for policy-making about the best available techniques in the coal chemical industry and other industries.

[1]  J. Siskos,et al.  Multi-criteria analysis of the impacts of energy alternatives: A survey and a new comparative approach , 1983 .

[2]  Vincent O'Malley,et al.  The Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive and its implications for the environment and industrial activities in Europe1The views expressed in this paper are the opinions of the author solely and not that of the organisation he represents.1 , 1999 .

[3]  Ari Nissinen,et al.  Industrial symbiosis and the policy instruments of sustainable consumption and production , 2011 .

[4]  Emanuele Graciosa Pereira,et al.  Sustainable energy: A review of gasification technologies , 2012 .

[5]  Men Chang-gui.  Basis for Selecting Coal Gasification Process Technology , 2009 .

[6]  Gao Ju-zhong.  Application and development of coal gasification technologies , 2013 .

[7]  O.Haluk Barda,et al.  Multicriteria location of thermal power plants , 1990 .

[8]  A. Minchener,et al.  Coal gasification for advanced power generation , 2005 .

[9]  Valérie Laforest,et al.  Choosing cleaner and safer production practices through a multi-criteria approach , 2013 .

[10]  B. Roy.  THE OUTRANKING APPROACH AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF ELECTRE METHODS , 1991 .

[11]  Jutta Geldermann,et al.  Proposal for an integrated approach for the assessment of cross-media aspects relevant for the determination of “best available techniques” bat in the european union , 1999 .

[12]  Jining Chen,et al.  Contributing to differentiated technology policy-making on the promotion of energy efficiency technologies in heavy industrial sector: a case study of China , 2016 .

[13]  Zhihua Wang,et al.  Up-to-date life cycle assessment and comparison study of clean coal power generation technologies in China , 2013 .

[14]  Sai Gu,et al.  Advances in mathematical modeling of fluidized bed gasification , 2014 .

[15]  Zongguo Wen,et al.  Best available techniques and pollution control: a case study on China’s thermal power industry , 2012 .

[16]  Joonas Hokkanen,et al.  The Choice of a Solid Waste Management System Using the Electre Ii Decision-Aid Method , 1995 .

[17]  J. Siskos,et al.  The Use of Multicriteria Outranking Methods in the Comparison of Control Options Against a Chemical Pollutant , 1986 .

[18]  Yu Qian,et al.  Environmental impact and techno-economic analysis of the coal gasification process with/without CO2 capture , 2014 .

[19]  Zongguo Wen,et al.  Goal and technology path of CO2 mitigation in China's cement industry: from the perspective of co-benefit , 2016 .

[20]  Ligang Zheng,et al.  Comparison of Shell, Texaco, BGL and KRW gasifiers as part of IGCC plant computer simulations , 2005 .

[21]  Wei Zhao,et al.  Coal chemical industry and its sustainable development in China , 2010 .

[22]  M. H. Chakrabarti,et al.  The effect of temperature on various parameters in coal, biomass and CO-gasification: A review , 2012 .

[23]  Zongguo Wen,et al.  Technological approaches and policy analysis of integrated water pollution prevention and control for the coal-to-methanol industry based on Best Available Technology , 2016 .

[24]  E. Zavadskas,et al.  Application of a quantitative multiple criteria decision making (MCDM-1) approach to the analysis of investments in construction , 2007 .

[25]  Zhang Rong-lin.  Selection and Comment Based on Coal Gasification Process Technology , 2008 .

[26]  Bernard Roy,et al.  Multicriteria programming of water supply systems for rural areas , 1992 .