基于生命周期法的煤电碳足迹评估

doi:10.11930/j.issn.1004-9649.202404039

中国电力 ›› 2024, Vol. 57 ›› Issue (7): 227-237.DOI: 10.11930/j.issn.1004-9649.202404039

基于生命周期法的煤电碳足迹评估

刘含笑¹^,²^,³(), 单思珂¹^,²(), 魏书洲³^,⁴, 于立元¹, 王帅¹, 刘美玲¹, 崔盈¹

1. 浙江菲达环保科技股份有限公司浙江省燃煤烟气净化装备研究重点实验室，浙江诸暨　311800
2. 华北电力大学能源动力与机械工程学院，北京　102206
3. 华中科技大学煤燃烧国家重点实验室，湖北武汉　430074
4. 三河发电有限责任公司，河北廊坊　065201

收稿日期:2024-04-08 出版日期:2024-07-28 发布日期:2024-07-23
作者简介:刘含笑（1987—），男，通信作者，硕士，高级工程师，从事大气污染治理及双碳技术研究，E-mail：gutounan@163.com
单思珂（2000—），男，硕士研究生，从事电力碳足迹全生命周期评估研究，E-mail：1179925720@qq.com
基金资助:
浙江省“尖兵”计划资助项目（2022C03030）；国家重点研发计划资助项目（2022YFC3701501）。

Life-Cycle Carbon Footprint Assessment of Coal-fired Power Generation

Hanxiao LIU¹^,²^,³(), Sike SHAN¹^,²(), Shuzhou WEI³^,⁴, Liyuan YU¹, Shuai WANG¹, Meiling LIU¹, Ying CUI¹

1. Key Laboratory of Coal Fired Flue Gas Purification Equipment Research of Zhejiang Feida Environmental Protection Technology Co., Ltd., Zhuji 311800, China
2. School of Energy, Power and Mechanical Engineering, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China
3. State Key Laboratory of Coal Combustion, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China
4. Sanhe Power Generation Co., Ltd., Langfang 065201, China

Received:2024-04-08 Online:2024-07-28 Published:2024-07-23
Supported by:
This work is supported by Carbon Special Project of "Vanguard" Plan of Zhejiang Province (No.2022C03030), National Key Research and Development Program of China (No.2022YFC3701501)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

碳足迹是量化碳排放的重要工具，能够为燃煤发电碳减排提供数据支撑。为研究燃煤机组的电力碳足迹及影响因素，基于生命周期法进行了实际案例计算及敏感性分析。碳足迹计算结果显示，300 MW燃煤发电机组的单位上网电量碳足迹为0.932 kgCO₂e/(kW·h)，主要排放源为煤炭燃烧，占比约为79%，其次是煤炭的上游生产和加工，占比约为20%。碳足迹和碳核查的对比分析结论表明，减碳不仅应从燃煤电厂的常规减碳方式入手，降低上游的煤炭供给阶段排放仍是一种有效方案。

关键词: 燃煤发电, 碳足迹, 生命周期法, 温室气体, 碳排放

Abstract:

Carbon footprint, as an essential tool for quantifying carbon emissions, provides data support for carbon emission reduction in coal-fired power generation. To investigate the electricity carbon footprint of coal-fired units and its influencing factors, actual case calculations and sensitivity analysis were conducted based on the life cycle method. The carbon footprint calculation results indicate that the carbon footprint per unit of grid-connected electricity for a 300 MW coal-fired power generation unit is 0.932 kgCO₂e/kW·h. The primary emission source is coal combustion, accounting for approximately 79%, followed by upstream coal production and processing, accounting for approximately 20%. The comparative analysis of carbon footprint and carbon verification concludes that reducing carbon emissions should not only focus on conventional methods in coal-fired power plants, but also consider reducing emissions in the upstream coal supply stage as an effective solution.

Key words: coal-fired power generation, carbon footprint, life cycle method, greenhouse gases, carbon emissions

刘含笑, 单思珂, 魏书洲, 于立元, 王帅, 刘美玲, 崔盈. 基于生命周期法的煤电碳足迹评估[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57(7): 227-237.

Hanxiao LIU, Sike SHAN, Shuzhou WEI, Liyuan YU, Shuai WANG, Meiling LIU, Ying CUI. Life-Cycle Carbon Footprint Assessment of Coal-fired Power Generation[J]. Electric Power, 2024, 57(7): 227-237.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.electricpower.com.cn/CN/10.11930/j.issn.1004-9649.202404039

https://www.electricpower.com.cn/CN/Y2024/V57/I7/227

图/表 9

参考文献 46

1	HORTON D E, JOHNSON N C, SINGH D, et al. Contribution of changes in atmospheric circulation patterns to extreme temperature trends[J]. Nature, 2015, 522, 465- 469. DOI
2	胡道成, 王睿, 赵瑞, 等. 二氧化碳捕集技术及适用场景分析[J]. 发电技术, 2023, 44 (4): 502- 513.
	HU Daocheng, WANG Rui, ZHAO Rui, et al. Research on carbon dioxide capture technology and suitable scenarios[J]. Power Generation Technology, 2023, 44 (4): 502- 513.
3	Energy Institute. Statistical review of world energy 2023[EB/OL]. (2023-06-01) [2024-04-30]. https://kpmg.com/cn/zh/home/campaigns/2023/10/statistical-review-of-world-energy-2023.html.
4	燕志鹏, 于泽民, 顾新莲. 我国碳排放价格与煤炭期货价格的传导机制研究[J]. 经济问题, 2022, (6): 67- 74. DOI
	YAN Zhipeng, YU Zemin, GU Xinlian. Research on conduction mechanism between carbon price and coal future price in China[J]. On Economic Problems, 2022, (6): 67- 74. DOI
5	王一蓉, 陈浩林, 林立身, 等. 考虑电力行业碳排放的全国碳价预测[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57 (5): 79- 87.
	WANG Yirong, CHEN Haolin, LIN Lishen, et al. National carbon price prediction considering carbon emissions from the power industry[J]. Electric Power, 2024, 57 (5): 79- 87.
6	IEA. Electricity 2024[EB/OL]. (2024-01-04) [2024-04-30]. https://www.iea.org/reports/electricity-2024.
7	王月明, 姚明宇, 张一帆, 等. 煤电的低碳化发展路径研究[J]. 热力发电, 2022, 51 (1): 11- 20.
	WANG Yueming, YAO Mingyu, ZHANG Yifan, et al. Study on low-carbon development path of coal-fired power generation[J]. Thermal Power Generation, 2022, 51 (1): 11- 20.
8	汤芳, 代红才, 张宁, 等. 能耗双控向碳排放双控转变影响分析及推进路径设计[J]. 中国电力, 2023, 56 (12): 255- 261.
	TANG Fang, DAI Hongcai, ZHANG Ning, et al. Effect analysis and promotion path design for transformation from energy consumption "dual control" to carbon "dual control"[J]. Electric Power, 2023, 56 (12): 255- 261.
9	METZ B, KUIJPERS L, SOLOMON S, et al. IPCC/TEAP special report on safe guarding the ozone layer and the global climate system: issues related to hydro fluorocarbons and perfluoro carbons[M]. Cambridge: Published for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [M] Cambridge University Press, 2005.
10	王斯一, 张彩虹, 米锋. 资源价值流视角下发电企业碳足迹与经济成本评价: 燃煤发电与生物质发电比较研究[J]. 工业技术经济, 2018, 37 (12): 78- 85. DOI
	WANG Siyi, ZHANG Caihong, MI Feng. Evaluation of carbon footprint and economic cost from the perspective of resource value flow of power generation enterprises[J]. Journal of Industrial Technological Economics, 2018, 37 (12): 78- 85. DOI
11	贾亚雷, 王继选, 韩中合, 等. 基于LCA的风力发电、光伏发电及燃煤发电的环境负荷分析[J]. 动力工程学报, 2016, 36 (12): 1000- 1009.
	JIA Yalei, WANG Jixuan, HAN Zhonghe, et al. Analysis on environmental load of wind, PV and coal-fired power generation based on life cycle assessment[J]. Journal of Chinese Society of Power Engineering, 2016, 36 (12): 1000- 1009.
12	宋国辉, 唐璐, 姜武, 等. 2×200MW级某天然气热电联产项目的生命周期环境影响评价[J]. 中国电力, 2014, 47 (12): 149- 155.
	SONG Guohui, TANG Lu, JIANG Wu, et al. Life-cycle environmental impact assessment of a typical 2 × 200 MW natural gas combined cycle-combined heat and power plant[J]. Electric Power, 2014, 47 (12): 149- 155.
13	刘顺妮, 林宗寿, 张小伟. 硅酸盐水泥的生命周期评价方法初探[J]. 中国环境科学, 1998, 18 (4): 328- 332. DOI
	LIU Shunni, LIN Zongshou, ZHANG Xiaowei. Studies on the life circle assessment of Portland cement[J]. China Environmental Science, 1998, 18 (4): 328- 332. DOI
14	国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 环境管理生命周期评价原则与框架: GB/T 24040—2008[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2008.
15	TONG R P, WANG Y R, ZHAO X, et al. Modeling health impacts of air pollutant emissions from the coal-fired power industry based on LCA and oriented by WTP: a case study[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 2022, 29 (23): 34486- 34499. DOI
16	MODAHL I S, ASKHAM C, LYNG K A, et al. Weighting of environmental trade-offs in CCS—an LCA case study of electricity from a fossil gas power plant with post-combustion CO₂ capture, transport and storage[J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2012, 17 (7): 932- 943. DOI
17	SCHMIDT M, NILL M, SCHOLZ J. Determining the scope 3 emissions of companies[J]. Chemical Engineering & Technology, 2022, 45 (7): 1218- 1230.
18	张振芳. 露天煤矿碳排放量核算及碳减排途径研究[D]. 徐州: 中国矿业大学, 2013.
	ZHANG Zhenfang. Study on carbon emissions accounting and carbon emission reduction approach of surface coal mine[D]. Xuzhou: China University of Mining and Technology, 2013.
19	邵志翔, 亢银虎, 卢啸风. 计及脱硫方式的CFB锅炉碳排放规律研究[J]. 电力学报, 2023, 38 (4): 278- 286.
	SHAO Zhixiang, KANG Yinhu, LU Xiaofeng. Study on carbon emission law of CFB boiler considering desulfurization method[J]. Journal of Electric Power, 2023, 38 (4): 278- 286.
20	VASSILEV S V, VASSILEVA C G. A new approach for the classification of coal fly ashes based on their origin, composition, properties, and behaviour[J]. Fuel, 2007, 86 (10/11): 1490- 1512.
21	YAN P F, MA Z G, LI H B, et al. Laboratory tests, field application and carbon footprint assessment of cement-stabilized pure coal solid wastes as pavement base materials[J]. Construction and Building Materials, 2023, 366, 130265. DOI
22	CELLURA M, CUSENZA M A, LONGO S. Energy-related GHG emissions balances: IPCC versus LCA[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2018, 628, 1328- 1339.
23	刘明达, 蒙吉军, 刘碧寒. 国内外碳排放核算方法研究进展[J]. 热带地理, 2014, 34 (2): 248- 258.
	LIU Mingda, MENG Jijun, LIU Bihan. Progress in the studies of carbon emission estimation[J]. Tropical Geography, 2014, 34 (2): 248- 258.
24	中华人民共和国生态环境部. 企业温室气体排放核算与报告指南发电设施[R/OL]. (2022-12-21) [2023-06-30]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/xxgk2018/xxgk/xxgk06/202212/t20221221_1008430.html.
25	ROSENTRETER J A, LARUELLE G G, BANGE H W, et al. Coastal vegetation and estuaries are collectively a greenhouse gas sink[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2023, 13 (6): 579- 587. DOI
26	ZAMPORI L, PANT R. Suggestions for updating the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) method[M]. Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2019.
27	中国工业节能与清洁生产协会. T/CIECCPA 055-2023燃煤发电产品碳足迹量化与评价方法[S]. 北京: 中国工业节能与清洁生产协会, 2023: 4–5.
28	TAO M, CHENG W Q, NIE K M, et al. Life cycle assessment of underground coal mining in China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 805, 150231. DOI
29	SONG X C, DU S, DENG C N, et al. Carbon emissions in China's steel industry from a life cycle perspective: Carbon footprint insights[J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2025, 148, 650- 664. DOI
30	彭美春, 朱兵禄, 胡红斐, 等. 重型货运车辆碳排放特性研究[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2016, 16 (1): 269- 272.
	PENG Meichun, ZHU Binglu, HU Hongfei, et al. Study on the carbon emission characteristics of the heavy duty freight trucks[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2016, 16 (1): 269- 272.
31	生态环保部. 关于做好2023—2025年发电行业企业温室气体排放报告管理有关工作的通知[EB/OL]. (2023-02-04) [2023-10-23]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/xxgk2018/xxgk/xxgk06/202302/t20230207_1015569.html.
32	侯萍, 王洪涛, 张浩, 等. 用于组织和产品碳足迹的中国电力温室气体排放因子[J]. 中国环境科学, 2012, 32 (6): 961- 967. DOI
	HOU Ping, WANG Hongtao, ZHANG Hao, et al. GreenHouse gas emission factors of Chinese power grids for organization and product carbon footprint[J]. China Environmental Science, 2012, 32 (6): 961- 967. DOI
33	OROZCO C, BABEL S, TANGTERMSIRIKUL S, et al. Comparison of environmental impacts of fly ash and slag as cement replacement materials for mass concrete and the impact of transportation[J]. Sustainable Materials and Technologies, 2024, 39, e00796. DOI
34	李莹, 段鹏选, 倪文, 等. 基于生命周期的工业副产石膏制备胶凝材料碳足迹评价[J]. 硅酸盐通报, 2023, 42 (6): 1921- 1930.
	LI Ying, DUAN Pengxuan, NI Wen, et al. Carbon footprint assessment of cementitious materials prepared from industrial by-product gypsum based on life cycle[J]. Bulletin of the Chinese Ceramic Society, 2023, 42 (6): 1921- 1930.
35	NATH P, SARKER P K, BISWAS W K. Effect of fly ash on the service life, carbon footprint and embodied energy of high strength concrete in the marine environment[J]. Energy and Buildings, 2018, 158, 1694- 1702. DOI
36	LIANG X Y, WANG Z H, ZHOU Z J, et al. Up-to-date life cycle assessment and comparison study of clean coal power generation technologies in China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2013, 39, 24- 31. DOI
37	刘韵, 师华定, 曾贤刚. 基于全生命周期评价的电力企业碳足迹评估: 以山西省吕梁市某燃煤电厂为例[J]. 资源科学, 2011, 33 (4): 653- 658.
	LIU Yun, SHI Huading, ZENG Xiangang. A life-cycle carbon footprint assessment of electric power companies[J]. Resources Science, 2011, 33 (4): 653- 658.
38	JUNG H S, RYOO S G, KANG Y T. Life cycle environmental impact assessment of Taean coal power plant with CO₂ capture module[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022, 357, 131663. DOI
39	PETRESCU L, BONALUMI D, VALENTI G, et al. Life Cycle Assessment for supercritical pulverized coal power plants with post-combustion carbon capture and storage[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 157, 10- 21. DOI
40	RASHEED R, JAVED H, RIZWAN A, et al. Life cycle assessment of a cleaner supercritical coal-fired power plant[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 279, 123869. DOI
41	KOORNNEEF J, VAN KEULEN T, FAAIJ A, et al. Life cycle assessment of a pulverized coal power plant with post-combustion capture, transport and storage of CO₂[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2008, 2 (4): 448- 467. DOI
42	WU X D, GUO J L, CHEN G Q. The striking amount of carbon emissions by the construction stage of coal-fired power generation system in China[J]. Energy Policy, 2018, 117, 358- 369. DOI
43	孙友源, 郑张, 秦亚琦, 等. 火电机组碳排放特性研究及管理建议[J]. 中国电力, 2018, 51 (3): 144- 149, 169.
	SUN Youyuan, ZHENG Zhang, QIN Yaqi, et al. Study on carbon emission characteristics and suggestions on carbon emission management of coal-fired power plant[J]. Electric Power, 2018, 51 (3): 144- 149, 169.
44	宋铜铜. 燃煤电厂碳排放强度核算及影响因素研究[D]. 北京: 华北电力大学, 2021.
	SONG Tongtong. Study on accounting and influencing factors of carbon emission intensity of coal-fired power plants[D]. Beijing: North China Electric Power University, 2021.
45	郭喜燕, 刘嘉康, 白雪, 等. 基于碳排放特性及碳交易规则的热电联产机组经济性分析[J]. 热力发电, 2023, 52 (4): 14- 23.
	GUO Xiyan, LIU Jiakang, BAI Xue, et al. Economic analysis of cogeneration units based on carbon emission characteristics and carbon trading rules[J]. Thermal Power Generation, 2023, 52 (4): 14- 23.
46	王宁玲, 刘嘉康, 陈宏彬, 等. 计及碳交易和调峰灵活性的多场景热电负荷优化分配[J]. 华北电力大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 50 (6): 76- 84.
	WANG Ningling, LIU Jiakang, CHEN Hongbin, et al. Optimal thermoelectric load dispatching and operation considering carbon trading and peak shaving[J]. Journal of North China Electric Power University (Natural Science Edition), 2023, 50 (6): 76- 84.

数据种类		数值
煤炭（烟煤）	用量/t	3.09×10⁶
	元素碳含量/(tC·t^–1)	0.54
	铁路运输里程/km	868.00
助燃剂（柴油）	用量/t	94.00
助燃剂（柴油）	元素碳含量/(tC·t^–1)	0.86
辅料	工艺水/t	1.69×10⁷
	尿素/t	941.00
	液氨/t	1.15×10³
	石灰石/t	4.80×10³
	各类用油/t	73.00
外购电	外购电/(MW·h)	0
产品	上网电量/(MW·h)	5.95×10⁶
产品	供热量/GJ	1.29×10¹⁰
副产品/废物	煤渣/t	7.30×10⁴
	除尘灰/t	4.62×10⁵
	石膏/t	8.40×10⁴

数据种类		数值
煤炭（烟煤）	用量/t	3.09×10⁶
	元素碳含量/(tC·t^–1)	0.54
	铁路运输里程/km	868.00
助燃剂（柴油）	用量/t	94.00
助燃剂（柴油）	元素碳含量/(tC·t^–1)	0.86
辅料	工艺水/t	1.69×10⁷
	尿素/t	941.00
	液氨/t	1.15×10³
	石灰石/t	4.80×10³
	各类用油/t	73.00
外购电	外购电/(MW·h)	0
产品	上网电量/(MW·h)	5.95×10⁶
产品	供热量/GJ	1.29×10¹⁰
副产品/废物	煤渣/t	7.30×10⁴
	除尘灰/t	4.62×10⁵
	石膏/t	8.40×10⁴

单元过程	排放因子	来源
煤炭开采/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	0.499	文献[28]
铁路运输/tCO₂e·(t·km)^–1	10.000	文献[29]
货运/tCO₂e·(t·km)^–1	0.052	文献[30]
外购电/tCO₂e·(MW·h)^–1	0.570	文献[31]
工艺水/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	1.905×10^–3	Ecoinvent3.8
尿素/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	2.898	Ecoinvent3.8
液氨/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	5.316	Ecoinvent3.8
脱硫石灰石生产/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	2.816×10^–3	Ecoinvent3.8
特种润滑油/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	1.457	Ecoinvent3.8
绝缘油/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	1.457	Ecoinvent3.8
柴油生产/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	0.853	文献[32]
除尘灰/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	–0.216	文献[33]
石膏/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	–0.099	文献[34]
粉煤灰/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	–0.253	文献[35]

单元过程	排放因子	来源
煤炭开采/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	0.499	文献[28]
铁路运输/tCO₂e·(t·km)^–1	10.000	文献[29]
货运/tCO₂e·(t·km)^–1	0.052	文献[30]
外购电/tCO₂e·(MW·h)^–1	0.570	文献[31]
工艺水/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	1.905×10^–3	Ecoinvent3.8
尿素/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	2.898	Ecoinvent3.8
液氨/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	5.316	Ecoinvent3.8
脱硫石灰石生产/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	2.816×10^–3	Ecoinvent3.8
特种润滑油/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	1.457	Ecoinvent3.8
绝缘油/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	1.457	Ecoinvent3.8
柴油生产/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	0.853	文献[32]
除尘灰/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	–0.216	文献[33]
石膏/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	–0.099	文献[34]
粉煤灰/(kgCO₂e·kg)^–1	–0.253	文献[35]

[1]	徐祥海, 商佳宜, 赵天煜, 龚莺飞, 何卫斌, 汤亚宸. 考虑碳排放限制与市场参与的储能利润优化[J]. 中国电力, 2025, 58(3): 204-212.
[2]	李江, 范袁铮, 刘博. 计及水泥厂直接碳排放碳责任的源-荷低碳优化运行方法[J]. 中国电力, 2025, 58(1): 141-152.
[3]	王栋, 冯景丽, 李达, 牛静伟, 李军. 基于区块链的园区碳排放可信监测模型[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57(7): 182-187.
[4]	吴静, 刘轩宇, 李响, 齐笑言, 李成俊, 张忠. 考虑网损的电力系统节点边际碳势理论研究与建模[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57(6): 215-224.
[5]	王一蓉, 陈浩林, 林立身, 唐进. 考虑电力行业碳排放的全国碳价预测[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57(5): 79-87.
[6]	李汶龙, 周云, 罗祾, 陈甜甜, 冯冬涵. 计及现货交易的电能量交易全环节用电碳责任分摊[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57(5): 99-112.
[7]	李祥光, 谭青博, 李帆琪, 李旭东, 谭忠富. 电碳耦合对煤电机组现货市场结算电价影响分析模型[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57(5): 113-125.
[8]	谭玲玲, 汤伟, 楚冬青, 于子涵, 吉兴全, 张玉敏. 考虑电-氢一体化的微电网低碳-经济协同优化调度[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57(5): 137-148.
[9]	李虎军, 张栋, 吕梦璇, 邓方钊, 杨萌, 元博. 考虑碳排放约束的新能源与调峰资源优化配置方法[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57(4): 42-51.
[10]	张娜, 赵琳, 商文颖, 吉星, 李佳, 黄玉辉. 基于STIRPAT模型的大连市全流程碳足迹溯源[J]. 中国电力, 2024, 57(1): 133-139.
[11]	张丽, 刘青雷, 张宏伟. 基于改进二进制粒子群算法的家庭负荷优化调度策略[J]. 中国电力, 2023, 56(5): 118-128.
[12]	任鑫, 王渡, 金亚飞, 王志刚. 基于能耗、经济性及碳排放的热电联产机组运行优化[J]. 中国电力, 2023, 56(4): 201-210.
[13]	陈家兴, 王春玲, 刘春明. 基于改进碳排放流理论的电力系统动态低碳调度方法[J]. 中国电力, 2023, 56(3): 162-172.
[14]	邱忠涛, 金艳鸣, 徐沈智. 全国碳市场扩容下电力平均排放因子选择对高耗能产业的影响分析[J]. 中国电力, 2023, 56(12): 1-7.
[15]	汤芳, 代红才, 张宁, 吴越, 薛美美, 陈睿. 能耗双控向碳排放双控转变影响分析及推进路径设计[J]. 中国电力, 2023, 56(12): 255-261.

基于生命周期法的煤电碳足迹评估

Life-Cycle Carbon Footprint Assessment of Coal-fired Power Generation

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 46

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

模态框（Modal）标题

基于生命周期法的煤电碳足迹评估

Life-Cycle Carbon Footprint Assessment of Coal-fired Power Generation

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 46

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics