| 引用本文: | 杨 超1
,杨志仁2
,徐 航3
,陈天才4
,赵小飞2
,尹福玉2
,苏亚楠2
,童 飞5
,陈瑜欣1.不同供热能源对烟草烤房烘烤环节的碳排放影响研究(J/M/D/N,J:杂志，M：书，D：论文，N：报纸).期刊名称,2025，42（5）：36-42 |
| CHEN X. Adap tive slidingmode contr ol for discrete2ti me multi2inputmulti2 out put systems[ J ]. Aut omatica, 2006, 42(6): 4272-435 |
|
| 本文已被：浏览 239次 下载 267次 |
码上扫一扫！ |
|
|
| 不同供热能源对烟草烤房烘烤环节的碳排放影响研究 |
|
杨 超1
,杨志仁2
,徐 航3
,陈天才4
,赵小飞2
,尹福玉2
,苏亚楠2
,童 飞5
,陈瑜欣1
|
|
1. 重庆市烟草公司彭水分公司,重庆 409600
2. 重庆交通大学 碳中和技术应用研究中心,重庆 400074
3. 重庆市烟草公司奉节分公司,重庆 404699
4. 重庆市烟草公司涪陵分公司,重庆 408000
5. 控峰(重庆)碳中和研究院有限公司,重庆 400060
|
|
| 摘要: |
| 目的 “双碳”目标背景下,烟草行业积极寻求替代传统燃煤化石能源的新型烤烟供热能源,以探索一条可持
续的绿色低碳发展之路。 然而,不同供热能源对烟草烤房烘烤环节的碳排放影响仍不清晰。 方法 采用碳排放因子
法和烟气实测法两种方法,对比分析了 4 种不同能源(燃煤、生物质、天然气和电能)烤房烘烤一炕腰部烟叶的 CO2
排放量。 结果 燃煤烤房的 CO2 浓度明显大于生物质烤房和天然气烤房,天然气烤房的 CO2 浓度最低;单位产品
(干烟叶)的 CO2 排放因子从大到小依次为:燃煤烤房>生物质烤房>天然气烤房>电烤房,分别为 3. 31、1. 80、1. 34
和 0. 85;采用生物质能源替代传统燃煤可减少 CO2 排放量 45. 6%。 结论 相比于传统燃煤,生物质能烟草烤房具有
明显的碳减排效果;该成果能够促进我国烟草行业绿色低碳可持续发展,助推我国“双碳”目标按期实现。 |
| 关键词: 烟草烤房 供热能源 生物质 碳排放 CO2 减排 |
| DOI： |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目: |
|
| Impact of Different Heating Energy Sources on Carbon Emissions in Tobacco Curing Barns |
|
YANG Chao
1
YANG Zhiren
2
XU Hang
3
CHEN Tiancai
4
ZHAO Xiaofei
2
YIN Fuyu
2
SU Yanan
2
TONG Fei
5
CHEN Yuxin
|
|
1. Pengshui Branch Chongqing Tobacco Company Chongqing 409600 China
2. Carbon Neutral Technology Application Research Center Chongqing Jiaotong University Chongqing 400074 China
3. Fengjie Branch Chongqing Tobacco Company Chongqing 404699 China
4. Fuling Branch Chongqing Tobacco Company Chongqing 408000 China
5. Kongfeng Chongqing Carbon Neutralization Research Institute Co. Ltd. Chongqing 400060 China
|
| Abstract: |
| Objective To find a sustainable path towards green and low-carbon development the tobacco industry is
actively searching for alternative heating energy sources to traditional coal and fossil fuels for curing tobacco leaves under
the background of the ??dual carbon goals. However it is still unclear how different heating energy sources affect carbon
emissions during the curing process in tobacco barns. Methods Using the carbon emission factor method and flue gas
measurement method the study compares and analyzes the carbon dioxide CO2
emissions from four different energy
sources coal biomass natural gas and electricity used for curing one batch of waist-level tobacco leaves in a barn.
Results The carbon dioxide concentration in coal-fired barns is significantly higher than that in biomass-fired and natural
gas-fired barns with the lowest concentration observed in natural gas-fired barns. The carbon dioxide emission factors per
unit of product dry tobacco leaves rank from highest to lowest are coal-fired barns>biomass-fired barns>natural gas-fired
barns>electric heating barns at 3. 31 1. 80 1. 34 and 0. 85 respectively. Replacing traditional coal with biomass energy
can reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 45. 6% per unit of product. Conclusion Compared with traditional coal biomass
energy in tobacco curing barns demonstrates a significant carbon emission reduction. These findings can promote green and
sustainable development in China?? s tobacco industry and contribute to achieving the ??dual carbon goals on schedule. |
| Key words: tobacco curing barns heating energy sources biomass carbon emissions CO2
emission reduction |
