2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142625
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The impacts of different heating systems on the environment: A review

Abstract: This paper presents a review of the environmental impacts of most heating systems drawing together published literature on the subject, not previously available. Here, a comparison between the different systems such as coal, wood, oil, natural gas, heat pump, geothermal and solar energy is provided in terms of their environmental impact. The most important parameters considered are the emission rate and toxicity. This places the coal-fired system as the worst among all heating systems regarding the impacts on … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 121 publications
0
19
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…With the proposed fuzzy Cauchy distribution membership function, the ensemble ranking, shown in the first row of Table 8, is as follows: (1) heat pump (air to water), (2) solar heating, (3) district heating (direct), (4) heat pump (ground source), (5) heat pump (air to water, low-price product), (6) district heating (indirect), (7) heat pump (air-to-air), (8) gas boiler, (9) oil boiler, (10) heat pump (gas-hybrid), (11) biomass boiler (manual), (12) biomass boiler (auto), and (13) woodstove. In order to validate the robustness of the ranking result, sensitive analysis of the possible influencing factors, which are the high variance weight and fuzzy parameter setting, is needed.…”
Section: Ensemble Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…With the proposed fuzzy Cauchy distribution membership function, the ensemble ranking, shown in the first row of Table 8, is as follows: (1) heat pump (air to water), (2) solar heating, (3) district heating (direct), (4) heat pump (ground source), (5) heat pump (air to water, low-price product), (6) district heating (indirect), (7) heat pump (air-to-air), (8) gas boiler, (9) oil boiler, (10) heat pump (gas-hybrid), (11) biomass boiler (manual), (12) biomass boiler (auto), and (13) woodstove. In order to validate the robustness of the ranking result, sensitive analysis of the possible influencing factors, which are the high variance weight and fuzzy parameter setting, is needed.…”
Section: Ensemble Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Heating systems differ in energy source, heat technology, equipment location, heat carrier, transfer mechanism and heat requirement in the heated spaces [8,9]. Energy sources are a major factor impacting the environment [10]; they are divided into fossil fuels, including oil, gas and coal, and renewables, including biomass, solar, geothermal, air, water, and waste [9]. Besides the traditional single energy source, research for combinations of multiple energy sources has increased, such as hybrid source heat pumps [11] and district heating [12].…”
Section: Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These emissions depend mainly on the type of heat source that is used in the heating system. Generally, the heat sources can be coal, wood, natural gas, diesel oil, solar energy, bioenergy, geothermal energy and waste heat [29].…”
Section: Environmental Outlookmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research of the technologies of installations and furnaces operated on low-grade solid fuels under conditions of using water with increased hardness have shown the need to debug the operating mode of the heating boiler, taking into account the combustion process, as a determining factor in the efficiency of oxidation of fuel elements and intensification of heat transfer in the device [1][2][3][4][5]. At the same time, the process of burning low-grade fuels is associated with environmental problems, primarily CO and CO2 emissions [6][7]. For heating boilers of low power today only CO emissions are standardized in Kazakhstan [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%