English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 43312/67235
Visitors : 2076989      Online Users : 2
RC Version 5.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU/NCHU Library IR team.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nchuir.lib.nchu.edu.tw/handle/309270000/152651

標題: 養豬場沼氣利用調查與數學模式建立之研究
Study on Biogas Utilization for Hog Farms Investigation and Establishing Mathematical Model
作者: 饒忠遠
Rao, Chung-Yuan
Contributors: 雷鵬魁
生物產業機電工程學系所
關鍵字: 沼氣;養豬場;沼氣發電;沼氣保溫
Biogas;Hog farm;Biogas power generation;Biogas heater (heating lamp)
日期: 2013
Issue Date: 2013-11-18 11:00:52 (UTC+8)
Publisher: 生物產業機電工程學系所
摘要: 本研究依照養豬產業與沼氣利用設備商的調查資料與前人的沼氣利用相關研究,建立一套可提供養豬農民選擇沼氣利用模式的數學模型,並依照調查資料驗證數學模型之可靠性且建立各規模養豬場之沼氣利用模式與設備量。
本研究之數學模型包含沼氣生產因子與沼氣利用模式,沼氣生產因子包含養豬頭數、氣溫與理論水力停留時間共3部分,其可決定養豬場的理論沼氣產量;而沼氣利用模式分為沼氣發電、沼氣保溫與沼氣燃燒共3部分,依照數學模型可計算出3種利用模式的設備規格與數量、成本效益及減碳效益。
本研究以養豬場實際設備資料作數學模型的驗證;驗證結果顯示,數學模型計算出的沼氣保溫燈數量為養豬場沼氣可供應的最大值,但是保溫燈實際數量則與分娩舍及保育舍的欄位量有關,故數學模型可計算出符合養豬場需求的保溫燈數量;驗證的養豬場實際的沼氣發電機規格為60kw,使用時間為每日12小時,而數學模式計算出較佳的沼氣發電機規格為30kw,每日使用時間為24小時,其發電總量不變,但是發電機成本明顯降低且能供應給降溫設備長時間使用的水簾式畜舍,故本研究之數學模型相當具有可靠性。
根據沼氣發電的數學模式評估結果可知,一般發電機搭配水洗複合式脫硫的成本最低,抗腐蝕發電機次之,一般發電機搭配生物脫硫塔則成本最高;根據數學模式計算結果中可以知道,台灣南部由於平均氣溫較高故其沼氣產量也高於台灣北部與中部;在台灣南部且水力停留時間操作正常的情形下評估規模1,000、3,000、5,000與10,000頭養豬場使用沼氣發電,其成本分別為42、59.5、95.5與174.5萬元,回收年限分別為1.1、1、0.8與0.7年及減碳量分別為736.6、2,101.4、3,537.3與7,074.5 tCO2e/year。沼氣保溫的計算結果為:其設置成本分別為15、46.5、76.5與144萬,回收年限分別為3、3、3與2.8年及減碳量分別為395、1,212.1、2,121.5與4,150.5tCO2e/year。沼氣燃燒的的計算結果為:其設置成本分別為8.1、20.3、32.5與62.6萬,無法估算其回收年限,而減碳量分別為662、1,989.4、3,312.9與6,625.7tCO2e/year。
The mathematical model established to select biogas utilization for hog farmer, in this study. It was developed through the survey data of pig industry and biogas utilization equipment manufacturers and previous studies about biogas utilization. The reliability of the mathematical model was verified by survey data. It established the applying models and the required equipments for varied scale hog farm

Biogas production factors and biogas utilization model were included in the mathematical model. Biogas production factors included the scale of hog farm, temperature and theoretical hydraulic retention time (HRT). It may be used to determine the theoretical biogas production of hog farm. Biogas utilization models included power generation, heating lamp and direct combustion. The mathematical model can calculate three types of biogas utilization model with equipment specifications and quantity, cost evaluation and carbon reduction.

The mathematical model was verified by the equipment survey data of hog farms. The result show that the number of heating lamp can be calculated by the mathematical model with the maximum biogas production of hog farm. However, the actual number of the heating lamp is related to the field design of farrowing house and nursery house. Thus, the mathematical model can calculate the required number of heat lamps for the hog farms. A 60kw generator was used to verify the mathematical model for a hog farm with the operating time of 12h/day. A 30kw generator was determined by the mathematical model with operating time of 24h/day. The total power generation is the same for both generators. But the cost of generator is significantly reduced and it can supply energy to the cooling equipment in water-pad hog house for long time operation. Thus, the reliability of the mathematical model had been properly verified.

Base on the evaluation results by the mathematical model for power generation, the cost of common generator with washing composite desulfurization is the lowest. The cost of anti-corrosion generator is lower. The cost of common generator with biological desulfurization tower is the highest. Base on the evaluation results by mathematical model, the biogas production of southern Taiwan is the highest among northern, central, and southern Taiwan, due to the highest average temperature. The power generations were evaluated under normal operation of HRT for 1,000, 3,000, 5,000 and 10,000 heads hog farm in southern Taiwan. The cost were 420,000, 595,000, 955,000 and 1,745,000 New Taiwan Dollars (NTD), respectively; payback period were 1.1, 1, 0.8 and 0.7 years, respectively; carbon reduction were 736.6, 2,101.4, 3,537.3 and 7,074.5 tCO2e/year, respectively. The calculation results for the heating lamp were described as followings: the cost were 150,000, 465,000, 765,000 and 1,440,000 NTD; payback period were 3, 3, 3 and 2.8 years; carbon reduction were 395, 1,212.1, 2,121.5 and 4,150.5 tCO2e/year, respectively. The calculation results for direct combustion were described as followings: the cost were 81,000, 203,000, 325,000 and 626,000 NTD; payback period cannot be estimated; carbon reduction were 662, 1,989.4, 3,312.9 and 6,625.7tCO2e/year, respectively.
Appears in Collections:[依資料類型分類] 碩博士論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
index.html0KbHTML194View/Open
nchu-102-7099040025-1.pdf2784Kb309View/Open


 


學術資源

著作權聲明

本網站為收錄中興大學學術著作及學術產出,已積極向著作權人取得全文授權,並盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益。如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員,將盡速為您處理。

本網站之數位內容為國立中興大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用。

聯絡網站維護人員:wyhuang@nchu.edu.tw,04-22840290 # 412。

DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU/NCHU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback