IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i13p10185-d1180517.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Study on Carbon Emission Characteristics and Emission Reduction Measures of Lime Production—A Case of Enterprise in the Yangtze River Basin

Author

Listed:
  • Erxi Wu

    (School of Resource and Environment Engineering, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430080, China)

  • Qiaozhi Wang

    (School of Resource and Environment Engineering, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430080, China)

  • Lihua Ke

    (School of Resource and Environment Engineering, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430080, China)

  • Guangquan Zhang

    (School of Resource and Environment Engineering, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430080, China)

Abstract

A scientific carbon accounting system can help enterprises reduce carbon emissions. This study took an enterprise in the Yangtze River basin as a case study. The accounting classification of carbon emissions in the life cycle of lime production was assessed, and the composition of the sources of carbon emission was analyzed, covering mining explosives, fuel (diesel, coal), electricity and high-temperature limestone decomposition. Using the IPCC emission factor method, a carbon life cycle emission accounting model for lime production was established. We determined that the carbon dioxide equivalent from producing one ton of quicklime ranged from 1096.68 kg CO 2 equiv. to 1176.96 kg CO 2 equiv. from 2019 to 2021 in the studied case. The decomposition of limestone at a high temperature was the largest carbon emission source, accounting for 64% of the total carbon emission. Coal combustion was the second major source of carbon emissions, accounting for 31% of total carbon emissions. Based upon the main sources of carbon emission for lime production, carbon emission reduction should focus on CO 2 capture technology and fuel optimization. Based on the error transfer method, we calculated that the overall uncertainty of the life cycle carbon emissions of quicklime from 2019 to 2021 are 2.13%, 2.07% and 2.09%, respectively. Using our analysis of carbon emissions, the carbon emission factor of producing one unit of quicklime in the lime enterprise in the Yangtze River basin was determined. Furthermore, this research into carbon emission reduction for lime production can provide a point of reference for the promotion of carbon neutrality in the same industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Erxi Wu & Qiaozhi Wang & Lihua Ke & Guangquan Zhang, 2023. "Study on Carbon Emission Characteristics and Emission Reduction Measures of Lime Production—A Case of Enterprise in the Yangtze River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-12, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:13:p:10185-:d:1180517
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/13/10185/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/13/10185/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Qing Tong & Sheng Zhou & Yuefeng Guo & Yang Zhang & Xinyang Wei, 2019. "Forecast and Analysis on Reducing China’s CO 2 Emissions from Lime Industrial Process," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Cavaignac, Renata S. & Ferreira, Newton L. & Guardani, Roberto, 2021. "Techno-economic and environmental process evaluation of biogas upgrading via amine scrubbing," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 868-880.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Apoorva Upadhyay & Andrey A. Kovalev & Elena A. Zhuravleva & Dmitriy A. Kovalev & Yuriy V. Litti & Shyam Kumar Masakapalli & Nidhi Pareek & Vivekanand Vivekanand, 2022. "Recent Development in Physical, Chemical, Biological and Hybrid Biogas Upgradation Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-30, December.
    2. Han, Siyu & Meng, Yuan & Aihemaiti, Aikelaimu & Gao, Yuchen & Ju, Tongyao & Xiang, Honglin & Jiang, Jianguo, 2022. "Biogas upgrading with various single and blended amines solutions: Capacities and kinetics," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 253(C).
    3. Krystian Butlewski, 2022. "Concept for Biomass and Organic Waste Refinery Plants Based on the Locally Available Organic Materials in Rural Areas of Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, May.
    4. Francesco Liberato Cappiello & Luca Cimmino & Marialuisa Napolitano & Maria Vicidomini, 2022. "Thermoeconomic Analysis of Biomethane Production Plants: A Dynamic Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-23, May.
    5. Khan, Muhammad Usman & Lee, Jonathan Tian En & Bashir, Muhammad Aamir & Dissanayake, Pavani Dulanja & Ok, Yong Sik & Tong, Yen Wah & Shariati, Mohammad Ali & Wu, Sarah & Ahring, Birgitte Kiaer, 2021. "Current status of biogas upgrading for direct biomethane use: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    6. Abd, Ammar Ali & Othman, Mohd Roslee & Helwani, Zuchra & Kim, Jinsoo, 2023. "Waste to wheels: Performance comparison between pressure swing adsorption and amine-absorption technologies for upgrading biogas containing hydrogen sulfide to fuel grade standards," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    7. Stančin, H. & Šafář, M. & Růžičková, J. & Mikulčić, H. & Raclavská, H. & Wang, X. & Duić, N., 2022. "Influence of plastic content on synergistic effect and bio-oil quality from the co-pyrolysis of waste rigid polyurethane foam and sawdust mixture," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 1218-1228.
    8. Shi, Tao & Zhou, Jianzhao & Ren, Jingzheng & Ayub, Yousaf & Yu, Haoshui & Shen, Weifeng & Li, Qiao & Yang, Ao, 2023. "Co-valorisation of sewage sludge and poultry litter waste for hydrogen production: Gasification process design, sustainability-oriented optimization, and systematic assessment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    9. Ruggero Bellini & Ilaria Bassani & Arianna Vizzarro & Annalisa Abdel Azim & Nicolò Santi Vasile & Candido Fabrizio Pirri & Francesca Verga & Barbara Menin, 2022. "Biological Aspects, Advancements and Techno-Economical Evaluation of Biological Methanation for the Recycling and Valorization of CO 2," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-34, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:13:p:10185-:d:1180517. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.