\r周志华¹，刘俊伟¹，王 媛¹，张 吉¹，王辰冬¹，黄 欣\r²\r
\r
AuthorsHTML:\r周志华¹，刘俊伟¹，王 媛¹，张 吉¹，王辰冬¹，黄 欣\r²\r
\r
AuthorsListE:\rZhou Zhihua ¹，Liu Junwei ¹，Wang Yuan ¹，Zhang Ji ¹，Wang Chendong ¹，Huang Xin \r²\r
\r
AuthorsHTMLE:\rZhou Zhihua ¹，Liu Junwei ¹，Wang Yuan ¹，Zhang Ji ¹，Wang Chendong ¹，Huang Xin \r²\r
\r
Unit:\r\r1. 天津大学环境科学与工程学院，天津 300072；\r
\r\r2. 天津富力房地产开发有限公司，天津300072\r
\r
\r
Unit_EngLish:\r1. School of Environmental Science and Engineering，Tianjin University，Tianjin 300072，China；
2. Tianjin Fuli Real Estate Development Co.，Ltd.，Tianjin 300072，China\r
\r
Abstract_Chinese:\r中国太阳能热水装机容量占世界总量70%左右，且85%以上采用真空管式集热器．面对国内越来越多的集中式系统，本文从运行效果、经济性及环境影响3 个方面对集中式真空管和平板太阳能热水系统进行对比研究，包括清单分析、生命周期环境影响以及能源-环境-初投资回收期．结果表明，真空管式太阳能热水系统(ETSHWS)生命周期环境影响所占比例最大的是化石能源耗竭潜值，占比约为30%；而平板太阳能热水系统(FPSHWS)所占比例最大的为矿产资源耗竭潜值，约为65%．相比于生命周期集热量产生的正面环境影响，生命周期总环境影响很小．另外，两系统能源回收期不到3 个月，环境回收期不到3 a，初投资回收期在8 a 之内；平板式太阳热水系统能源回收期、环境回收期和初投资回收期分别为真空管式太能热水系统的1.5 倍、2.7 倍和1.7 倍，就运行效果、环境影响和经济性而言，真空管式太阳能系统明显优于平板式太阳能系统．若以建筑60 a 的使用期来计算，ETSHWS环境影响和正面环境影响均优于FPSHWS，但FPSHWS的初投资要优于ETSHWS．\r
\r
Abstract_English:\rThe installed capacity of solar hot water systems in China accounts for approximately 70% of the global solar hot water installations，and more than 85% of these Chinese solar hot water installations use evacuated tube collectors. Based on the large amount of centralized solar hot water systems adopted in China，we conducted a comparative study of the evacuated tube solar hot water system(ETSHWS)and flat plate solar hot water system (FPSHWS)with respect to three aspects：operating performance，economic performance，and environmental impact. This research included various methods，such as inventory analysis，life cycle environmental impact assessment，and energy-environment-economic payback period analysis. The results showed that the largest environmental impact type of the ETSHWS is the abiotic depletion potential(ADP)fossil，which accounts for approximately 30% of the total environment impact，while the largest environmental impact type of FPSHWS are the ADP elements，which account for approximately 65% of the total environment impact. The total environmental impact of the life cycle is very small as compared to the positive environmental impact generated by heat collection. In addition，the energy payback period(EPP)，environmental impact payback period(EIPP)，and investment payback period(IPP)of the two systems are less than three months，less than three years，and less than eight years，respectively. These values of the FPSHWS are 1.5 times，2.7 times，and 1.7 times that of the ETSHWS，respectively. The ETSHWS is significantly superior as compared to the FPSHWS in terms of operating performance，economic performance，and environmental impact. However，based on the 60-year usage period of Chinese buildings，the environmental and positive environmental impacts of the FPSHWS are better than those of the ETSHWS. However，the initial investment of the two systems is just the opposite.\r
\r
Keyword_Chinese:集中式热水系统；集热器；生命周期评价；回收期\r

Keywords_English:centralized solar hot water system；solar collector；life cycle assessment(LCA)；payback period\r


PDF全文下载地址:http://xbzrb.tju.edu.cn/#/digest?ArticleID=6381