首页|期刊导航|环境工程学报|废塑料资源化途径的碳排放比较研究

废塑料资源化途径的碳排放比较研究OA

Comparative study on carbon emissions from recycling pathways for waste plastics

中文摘要英文摘要

随着全球废塑料产量的持续增长,废塑料的回收利用已成为推动行业绿色低碳发展的关键挑战.基于此,该研究采用生命周期法和排放因子法,核算了 6种塑料回收途径的碳排放,以充实固废资源化利用领域对碳核算的研究,并为行业碳减排及碳交易提供科学依据.该模型核算了运行能耗间接碳排放、塑料分解直接碳排放以及资源化利用碳补偿,分析了不同途径的碳排放差异及净碳排放情况.核算结果表明:1)从碳排放量来看,共焦法、固体燃料法和直接焚烧的碳排放量较高,而热解法、物理再生和醇解回收的碳排放量较低;2)从碳补偿来看,热解法展现出最高的碳补偿(约-3 024 kgCO2e),物理再生表现出 88%的高回收率和-991.4 kgCO2e的碳补偿;3)从净碳排放来看,处置 1 t废塑料的碳排放量顺序为直接焚烧(1 104 kgCO2e)>共焦法(185.8 kgCO2e)>固体燃料法(115.4 kgCO2e)>醇解回收(-259.5 kgCO2e)>物理再生(-991.4 kgCO2e)>热解法(-2 592 kgCO2e).研究显示,废塑料资源化途径中热解法在碳排放与碳补偿效益方面优于直接焚烧,且全生命周期碳足迹呈现负碳趋势,为废塑料资源化助力减排的可行途径,本核算结果可为其他废塑料资源化处理碳核算提供参考.

Against the backdrop of continuously growing global plastic waste production,recycling waste plastics had become a critical challenge in driving the green and low-carbon transformation of the industry.In response,this study applied the life cycle assessment(LCA)method and the emission factor approach to calculate carbon emissions across six plastic recycling pathways.The aim was to enrich carbon accounting research in the field of solid waste resource utilization and to provide a scientific basis for industrial carbon reduction and carbon trading.The model quantified indirect carbon emissions from operational energy consumption,direct carbon emissions from plastic decomposition,and carbon credits generated through resource recovery.It also analyzed variations in carbon emissions and net carbon emissions across different recycling pathways.The results showed that regarding carbon emissions,co-combustion,solid fuel production,and direct incineration exhibited relatively high emission levels,while pyrolysis,physical recycling,and alcoholysis yielded lower emissions.Moreover,in terms of carbon credits,pyrolysis offered the highest carbon offset(approximately-3 024 kgCO2e),whereas physical recycling,with a recovery rate of 88%,provided a carbon credit of-991.4 kgCO2e.As for net carbon emissions,the ranking for treating 1 t of waste plastic was as follows:direct incineration(1 104 kgCO2e)>co-combustion(185.8 kgCO2e)>solid fuel production(115.4 kgCO2e)>alcoholysis(-259.5 kgCO2e)>physical recycling(-991.4 kgCO2e)>pyrolysis(-2 592 kgCO2e).This study demonstrated that,among waste plastic resource utilization pathways,pyrolysis outperformed direct incineration in terms of both carbon emissions and carbon offset benefits.Its full life-cycle carbon footprint showed a negative carbon trend,making it a feasible pathway for waste plastic resource utilization to contribute to emission reduction goals.These findings could serve as a reference for carbon accounting in other waste plastic resource recovery processes.

周萧超;张媛媛;许嘉钰;张婷婷

北京化工大学化学工程学院,北京 100029山东石油化工学院化学工程学院,东营 257061清华大学环境学院,北京 100084北京化工大学化学工程学院,北京 100029

资源环境

废塑料资源化碳排放核算排放因子法

waste plasticresource utilizationcarbon emission calculationemission factor approach

《环境工程学报》 2026 (5)

1412-1420,9

中国工程院咨询资助项目(2023-PP-06)

10.12030/j.cjee.202509053

评论