Liu Hansi et al.

/ Energy Procedia 105 (2017) 3456 – 3463 3461

S olar 0.5 0.0 [17]

Biomass-- 0.2 45.1 [18]
M ethane
W ind Power 0.0 6.0 [10]

5. Results and Discussion

5.1. Main Results

Table 4. Main Results of This Paper

Case Abbreviation Energy Life Cycle Life Cycle GHG

C onsumption E nergy E mission (CO2-
(10 3 GJ) Consumption E quivalent)
( 10 3 GJJ) ( 100 ton))
1 All NG 521.576 623.804 379.342
2 Coal + Grid 489.129 680.426 614.921
Electricity
3 All Coal 908.518 1064.783 949.401
4 Local Solar 489.129 646.952 574.292
Maximum Utilization
5 Local Biomass 489.129 468.584 443.848
Maximum Utilization
6 Outside Wind 501.716 440.489 400.309
Electricity

Fig.1. Energy Consumption and GHG Emission Reduction in Case Comparisons

As Table 4 and Figure 1 shows, in the base case gas based Distributed Energy System project has
desirable performance in environmental value. When compared with traditional project, gas based
Distributed Energy System project seems to use 7% more energy as input, but in a Life-Cycle view, it
reduces energy consumption and GHG emission significantly (8% and 38% respectively). Compared with
case when electricity is bought from the grid, it has even greater advantage. Renewable energy has the
potential to develop in the future. Constrained by solar resources in Sichuan Province, solar based
Distributed Energy System project has positive but limited effect in energy saving and emission reduction.