IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i16p12130-d1212939.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of Flexible Tools in Magnesia Sector: The Case of Grecian Magnesite

Author

Listed:
  • Nikolaos Margaritis

    (Centre for Research & Technology Hellas, Chemical Process and Energy Resources Institute (CERTH/CPERI), 4th km. N.R. Ptolemais-Mpodosakeio, 50200 Ptolemais, Greece)

  • Christos Evaggelou

    (Centre for Research & Technology Hellas, Chemical Process and Energy Resources Institute (CERTH/CPERI), 4th km. N.R. Ptolemais-Mpodosakeio, 50200 Ptolemais, Greece)

  • Panagiotis Grammelis

    (Centre for Research & Technology Hellas, Chemical Process and Energy Resources Institute (CERTH/CPERI), 4th km. N.R. Ptolemais-Mpodosakeio, 50200 Ptolemais, Greece)

  • Roberto Arévalo

    (CIRCE—Research Center, Industrial Park Dinamiza 3D, 1st Floor, 50018 Zaragoza, Spain
    School of Architecture & Polytechnic, University Europea de Valencia, Paseo de la Alameda 7, 46010 Valencia, Spain)

  • Haris Yiannoulakis

    (Research and Development Center, Grecian Magnesite S.A., 57006 Thessaloniki, Greece)

  • Polykarpos Papageorgiou

    (Yerakini Mines and Works, Grecian Magnesite S.A. (GM), 63100 Chalkidiki, Greece)

Abstract

In this paper, two flexible model tools (CO 2 emissions/cost tool and CFD tool) that simulate the production process of Grecian Magnesite (GM) and extract economic and technical conclusions regarding the substitution of fossil fuels with various types of biomass are presented and analyzed. According to the analysis, the higher the substitution, the higher the profit in both CO 2 emissions and cost reduction. The reduction in CO 2 emissions that can be achieved through biomass fuel substitution ranges from 15% for a 30% substitution to 35% for a 70% substitution. Accordingly, production costs are also reduced with the use of biomass. The initial results of this decision-making cost tool showed that the most profitable solution is a 70% substitution, for which production costs can be reduced by up to 38.7%, while the most beneficial type of biomass proved to be the olive kernel. A proposed and feasible solution is the substitution of 50% sunflower husk pellets, which will result in a reduction of 25% in CO 2 emissions and almost 10% in production cost. From CFD simulation, a reduced order model (ROM) has been developed that allows the running of scenarios in real time, instead of the usual long times required by complex simulations. Comparative studies of fuel blend and biomass type can be carried out easily and rapidly, allowing one to choose the most suitable substitution.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikolaos Margaritis & Christos Evaggelou & Panagiotis Grammelis & Roberto Arévalo & Haris Yiannoulakis & Polykarpos Papageorgiou, 2023. "Application of Flexible Tools in Magnesia Sector: The Case of Grecian Magnesite," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-30, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:16:p:12130-:d:1212939
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/16/12130/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/16/12130/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sen, Suphi & Vollebergh, Herman, 2018. "The effectiveness of taxing the carbon content of energy consumption," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 74-99.
    2. König, Andreas, 2011. "Cost efficient utilisation of biomass in the German energy system in the context of energy and environmental policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 628-636, February.
    3. An, Jing & Xue, Xiangxin, 2017. "Life-cycle carbon footprint analysis of magnesia products," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 4-11.
    4. Upadhyay, Mukesh & Kim, Ayeon & Paramanantham, SalaiSargunan S. & Kim, Heehyang & Lim, Dongjun & Lee, Sunyoung & Moon, Sangbong & Lim, Hankwon, 2022. "Three-dimensional CFD simulation of proton exchange membrane water electrolyser: Performance assessment under different condition," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 306(PA).
    5. Joeri Rogelj & Michel den Elzen & Niklas Höhne & Taryn Fransen & Hanna Fekete & Harald Winkler & Roberto Schaeffer & Fu Sha & Keywan Riahi & Malte Meinshausen, 2016. "Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C," Nature, Nature, vol. 534(7609), pages 631-639, June.
    6. Yuan, Shuai & Zhou, Zhi-jie & Li, Jun & Wang, Fu-chen, 2012. "Nitrogen conversion during rapid pyrolysis of coal and petroleum coke in a high-frequency furnace," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 854-859.
    7. Gustavsson, L., 1997. "Energy efficiency and competitiveness of biomass-based energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 22(10), pages 959-967.
    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. Wang, Bingzheng & Lu, Xiaofei & Zhang, Cancan & Wang, Hongsheng, 2022. "Cascade and hybrid processes for co-generating solar-based fuels and electricity via combining spectral splitting technology and membrane reactor," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 782-799.
    2. Sapkota, Krishna & Gemechu, Eskinder & Oni, Abayomi Olufemi & Ma, Linwei & Kumar, Amit, 2022. "Greenhouse gas emissions from Canadian oil sands supply chains to China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    3. Piris-Cabezas, Pedro & Lubowski, Ruben N. & Leslie, Gabriela, 2023. "Estimating the potential of international carbon markets to increase global climate ambition," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    4. Alt, Marius & Gallier, Carlo & Kesternich, Martin & Sturm, Bodo, 2023. "Collective minimum contributions to counteract the ratchet effect in the voluntary provision of public goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    5. Rong Li & Brent Sohngen & Xiaohui Tian, 2022. "Efficiency of forest carbon policies at intensive and extensive margins," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(4), pages 1243-1267, August.
    6. Johan Lilliestam & Anthony Patt & Germán Bersalli, 2022. "On the quality of emission reductions: observed effects of carbon pricing on investments, innovation, and operational shifts. A response to van den Bergh and Savin (2021)," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 733-758, November.
    7. Róbert Csalódi & Tímea Czvetkó & Viktor Sebestyén & János Abonyi, 2022. "Sectoral Analysis of Energy Transition Paths and Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-26, October.
    8. Sanzana Tabassum & Tanvin Rahman & Ashraf Ul Islam & Sumayya Rahman & Debopriya Roy Dipta & Shidhartho Roy & Naeem Mohammad & Nafiu Nawar & Eklas Hossain, 2021. "Solar Energy in the United States: Development, Challenges and Future Prospects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-65, December.
    9. Heleen L. Soest & Lara Aleluia Reis & Luiz Bernardo Baptista & Christoph Bertram & Jacques Després & Laurent Drouet & Michel Elzen & Panagiotis Fragkos & Oliver Fricko & Shinichiro Fujimori & Neil Gra, 2021. "Global roll-out of comprehensive policy measures may aid in bridging emissions gap," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    10. Teresa Famulska & Jan Kaczmarzyk & Małgorzata Grząba-Włoszek, 2022. "Environmental Taxes in the Member States of the European Union—Trends in Energy Taxes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-20, November.
    11. Angela Köppl & Stefan Schleicher & Margit Schratzenstaller & Karl W. Steininger, 2020. "COVID-19, Klimawandel und Konjunkturpakete," WIFO Research Briefs 1, WIFO.
    12. Meng, Xiaoxiao & Sun, Rui & Ismail, Tamer M. & El-Salam, M. Abd & Zhou, Wei & Zhang, Ruihan & Ren, Xiaohan, 2018. "Assessment of primary air on corn straw in a fixed bed combustion using Eulerian-Eulerian approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 501-519.
    13. Wang, Mengmeng & Liu, Kang & Dutta, Shanta & Alessi, Daniel S. & Rinklebe, Jörg & Ok, Yong Sik & Tsang, Daniel C.W., 2022. "Recycling of lithium iron phosphate batteries: Status, technologies, challenges, and prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    14. Kaberger, Tomas, 1997. "A comment on the paper by Roger A. Sedjo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 567-569, May.
    15. Carl-Friedrich Schleussner & Joeri Rogelj & Michiel Schaeffer & Tabea Lissner & Rachel Licker & Erich M. Fischer & Reto Knutti & Anders Levermann & Katja Frieler & William Hare, 2016. "Science and policy characteristics of the Paris Agreement temperature goal," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(9), pages 827-835, September.
    16. Liang, Yanan & Kleijn, René & Tukker, Arnold & van der Voet, Ester, 2022. "Material requirements for low-carbon energy technologies: A quantitative review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    17. Abdullah Al-Badi & Abdulmajeed Al Wahaibi & Razzaqul Ahshan & Arif Malik, 2022. "Techno-Economic Feasibility of a Solar-Wind-Fuel Cell Energy System in Duqm, Oman," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-14, July.
    18. Ana Luiza Carvalho Ferrer & Antonio Márcio Tavares Thomé, 2023. "Carbon Emissions in Transportation: A Synthesis Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-28, May.
    19. Federica Cucchiella & Idiano D’Adamo & Massimo Gastaldi, 2018. "Future Trajectories of Renewable Energy Consumption in the European Union," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-13, February.
    20. Li, Shiyuan & Xu, Mingxin & Jia, Lufei & Tan, Li & Lu, Qinggang, 2016. "Influence of operating parameters on N2O emission in O2/CO2 combustion with high oxygen concentration in circulating fluidized bed," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 197-209.

    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:16:p:12130-:d:1212939. 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.