Evaluation method for construction and operation of electric heating network in industrial park

Abstract

The invention discloses an industrial park electric heating network construction operation evaluation method. According to the evaluation method, starting from four key dimensions of economy, energy conservation, low-carbon environmental protection and safety, an industrial park electric heating network operation evaluation index system applied to a comprehensive benefit evaluation model to evaluate the operation effect of a low-carbon industrial park is constructed, and each index system internally comprises 28 types of secondary evaluation indexes in total. On the basis of an index evaluation system, a set of comprehensive evaluation method is constructed, a TOPSIS method is combined to evaluate the distance between each scheme and an ideal solution, the relevance between indexes is analyzed by using a grey relational degree, a comprehensive pasting progress score is finally calculated, and the comprehensive benefit of each scene is quantitatively evaluated; and a set of complete industrial park electric heating network comprehensive benefit evaluation process or method is formed. The method provided by the invention can provide theoretical basis and method support for promoting green low-carbon transformation of industrial parks.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of integrated energy utilization technology in industrial parks, and in particular to an evaluation method for the construction and operation of electric heating networks in industrial parks. Background Technology

[0002] Industrial parks have high energy consumption intensity and diverse energy consumption patterns, with abundant medium- and low-temperature geothermal resources and waste heat resources, offering broad prospects for the synergistic development of electricity and heat energy. However, the comprehensive utilization rate of different types of energy in industrial parks is still relatively low, the tiered utilization rate of energy at different energy levels remains insufficient, and there is significant room for coordinated development among different energy networks. According to statistics from the International Energy Agency, heating activities in buildings and industrial processes constitute the world's largest end-use energy consumption sector. Heating production activities account for approximately 50% of global end-use energy consumption and about 40% of global carbon dioxide emissions. Of the heat energy consumed, the industrial sector accounts for approximately 50%, and building heating accounts for approximately 46%. Therefore, the cleanliness and decarbonization of heating processes within industrial parks, as well as the degree of coordinated development of electricity and heating networks, will play a crucial role in achieving carbon peaking and carbon neutrality.

[0003] In response to the urgent need for green and low-carbon development in industrial parks, the coordinated development and practical implementation of power and heating networks are imminent. The state has also successively encouraged and promoted the low-carbon construction of industrial parks. However, there is a lack of accurate evaluation methods for assessing the development level of power and heating networks in industrial parks, which is not conducive to the self-evaluation and development planning of industrial parks. There is an urgent need for relevant evaluation tools to enhance the self-management level of industrial parks. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of this invention is to overcome the shortcomings and defects of the prior art and provide an evaluation method for the construction and operation of electric heating networks in industrial parks.

[0005] An evaluation method for the construction and operation of an industrial park's electric heating network, comprising the following steps:

[0006] An evaluation index system is constructed from four dimensions: economy, energy saving, low carbon and environmental protection, and safety. The evaluation index system includes economic indicators, energy saving indicators, low carbon and environmental protection indicators, and safety indicators.

[0007] Based on the aforementioned evaluation index system, the data of the indicators that have the greatest impact on low-carbon industrial parks are selected from four dimensions: economy, safety, low-carbon environmental protection, and energy conservation. After standardization, the superior-inferiority distance and grey relational degree determined by the index weights are calculated based on the standardized data using the entropy weight-TOPSIS-grey relational degree method. Then, the comprehensive application progress is solved based on the superior-inferiority distance and grey relational degree. The comprehensive application progress is ranked according to its score, and the construction and operation of the industrial park's electric heating network are comprehensively evaluated based on the ranking and weights.

[0008] Preferably, when analyzing and processing indicator data, the indicator data is first quantified uniformly, the extremely small data is positiveized, and then the positive data is standardized to obtain a standardized matrix, which is then solved.

[0009] Preferably, the overall patching progress is represented as C. i The equations to be solved include:

[0010]

[0011] in, These represent the optimal and worst distances in Euclid, respectively. and ω represents the corresponding positive and negative gray correlation, indicating the correlation with the optimal and worst ideal values; D ω R These represent the corresponding overall weights.

[0012] Preferably, the positive and negative gray relational degrees are solved by the following equations:

[0013]

[0014] Among them, Y i + and Y i - Y represents the maximum and minimum data in the i-th column of the standardized matrix, respectively. ij To standardize data, denoted as the corresponding index weights in the grey relational degree calculation, and ρ is the resolution coefficient.

[0015] Preferably, the Euclid optimal distance and worst distance are calculated by defining the maximum and minimum values ​​in the normalization matrix, and then solving based on the maximum and minimum values, including:

[0016]

[0017] and w represents the maximum and minimum data in column j of the standardized matrix. j As the indicator weight;

[0018]

[0019] Preferably, the index weights are calculated using the following equation:

[0020]

[0021] Among them, e j E represents the information entropy of each indicator. jThis represents the information utility value.

[0022] Preferably, the economic indicators include equipment construction cost, line loss rate, cost per unit line length, input-output ratio, cost per unit substation capacity, energy purchase cost, power supply load per unit asset, and cost of abandoned electricity.

[0023] Among them, equipment construction costs include unit investment cost of equipment, total annual investment based on capacity, annual processing capacity, annual depreciation cost, annual operation and maintenance cost, and daily cost allocation;

[0024] Among them, energy purchase cost is the sum of electricity and gas purchase costs;

[0025] Among them, the cost of abandoned electricity is α WT P WT,lost (t) represents the unit power curtailment penalty cost coefficient and the amount of power curtailed during time period t, respectively.

[0026] Preferably, the energy-saving indicators include total thermal efficiency, heat-to-power ratio, energy output rate, renewable energy utilization rate, clean energy utilization rate, and waste heat resource recovery and utilization rate.

[0027] Preferably, the low-carbon and environmentally friendly indicators include carbon emission intensity, wind power utilization rate, annual reduction in non-renewable energy consumption, annual reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, annual reduction in sulfur dioxide emissions, annual reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions, and air quality compliance; wherein carbon emission intensity is calculated using the following formula:

[0028]

[0029] in, P represents the CO2 emissions per unit of heat supplied by the system. a P represents the CO2 emissions per unit heat supplied by an electrically operated, high-temperature-difference heat exchanger. g P represents the CO2 emissions per unit of heat supplied at a gas-fired peak-shaving heating station. CS OF represents the CO2 emissions per unit of heat supplied at a power plant. s For the carbon oxidation rate of coal combustion, OF g b represents the carbon oxidation rate of coal combustion. CS b a b g ρ g These represent the emission coefficient and heat loss coefficient for the corresponding unit of heat supply, respectively.

[0030] Preferably, the safety indicators include voltage qualification rate, system fault location accuracy rate, equipment loss, smart meter installation rate, smart heat meter application rate, electricity consumption information collection system coverage rate, and customer service information system coverage rate; the voltage qualification rate includes the voltage qualification rate of different users' electricity consumption and the comprehensive voltage qualification rate obtained based on the voltage qualification rate of different users' electricity consumption; the equipment loss includes equipment loss cost and energy conversion rate, and the energy conversion rate is the ratio between the total system load demand and the energy supply of the upper-level network within a scheduling cycle;

[0031]

[0032] In the formula, I energy Indicates energy conversion rate, These are the calorific value of natural gas, the calorific value of hydrogen, and the maximum wind power output, respectively. These are the electricity consumption for electrical load, the heat consumption for thermal load, the gas consumption, and the hydrogen consumption. These are the electricity and gas purchased from external sources, respectively.

[0033] The evaluation method for the construction and operation of industrial park electric heating networks of this invention proposes an evaluation index system for the operation of industrial park electric heating networks, based on four key dimensions: economy, energy saving, low carbon and environmental protection, and safety. The index system combines the TOPSIS method to evaluate the distance between each scheme and the ideal solution, and uses grey relational analysis to analyze the correlation between the indicators. Finally, the comprehensive progress score is calculated, and the comprehensive benefits of each scenario are quantitatively evaluated. This forms a complete comprehensive benefit evaluation process for industrial park electric heating networks, providing theoretical basis and methodological support for promoting the green and low carbon transformation of industrial parks. Attached Figure Description

[0034] Figure 1 This is a diagram of the economic indicator system of the present invention.

[0035] Figure 2 This is a diagram of the energy-saving index system of the present invention.

[0036] Figure 3 This is a diagram of the low-carbon and environmentally friendly indicator system of the present invention.

[0037] Figure 4 This is a diagram of the safety index system of the present invention.

[0038] Figure 5 This is a flowchart of the low-carbon industrial park assessment method of the present invention.

[0039] Figure 6 This is a comparison chart of the comprehensive evaluation scores for scenarios 1-5 in the industrial park.

[0040] Figure 7This is a weight distribution diagram of the evaluation system indicators under the optimal scenario in the industrial park. Detailed Implementation

[0041] The present invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are merely illustrative of the invention and are not intended to limit the invention.

[0042] This invention constructs an evaluation index system for the operation of electric heating networks in industrial parks, based on four key dimensions: economy, energy saving, low carbon and environmental protection, and safety. Each index system contains a total of 28 secondary evaluation indicators, which are subsequently applied to a comprehensive benefit evaluation model to assess the operational effectiveness of low-carbon industrial parks. A comprehensive evaluation method is built upon this index evaluation system, combining the TOPSIS method to assess the distance between each scheme and the ideal solution, and utilizing grey relational analysis to analyze the correlation between indicators. Finally, a comprehensive progress score is calculated, quantitatively evaluating the comprehensive benefits of each scenario. This forms a complete process or method for evaluating the comprehensive benefits of electric heating networks in industrial parks, providing theoretical basis and methodological support for promoting the green and low-carbon transformation of industrial parks.

[0043] See Figures 1 to 5 As shown in the exemplary embodiment of this application, the evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park's electric heating network includes the following steps:

[0044] An evaluation index system is constructed from four dimensions: economy, energy saving, low carbon and environmental protection, and safety. The evaluation index system includes economic indicators, energy saving indicators, low carbon and environmental protection indicators, and safety indicators.

[0045] Based on the aforementioned evaluation index system, the data of the indicators that have the greatest impact on low-carbon industrial parks are selected from four dimensions: economy, safety, low-carbon environmental protection, and energy conservation. After standardization, the superior-inferiority distance and grey relational degree determined by the index weights are calculated based on the standardized data using the entropy weight-TOPSIS-grey relational degree method. Then, the comprehensive application progress is solved based on the superior-inferiority distance and grey relational degree. The comprehensive application progress is ranked according to its score, and the construction and operation of the industrial park's electric heating network are comprehensively evaluated based on the ranking and weights.

[0046] In this application, for example, considering that industrial parks are a key target for green industrial transformation, an evaluation index system is constructed from four dimensions: economic efficiency, energy efficiency, low carbon and environmental protection, and safety.

[0047] 1. Economic indicators

[0048] In the construction and operation of power and heating networks in industrial parks, economic evaluation indicators are mainly used to reflect the overall benefits of the power grid and heating network during integrated operation, as well as key aspects such as energy efficiency and equipment utilization. Among the economic evaluation indicators for power and heating networks, secondary indicators cover multiple dimensions, including grid losses, construction costs, asset utilization, and output benefits. These indicators not only reflect the operating efficiency of the distribution network but also embody the energy efficiency management of the heating network, particularly the economic benefits in electrothermal conversion and combined heat and power (CHP). Through sensitivity, risk, and break-even analysis of these indicators, the design and operation schemes of power and heating networks can be further optimized to ensure the dual advantages of low-carbon industrial parks in terms of energy utilization and economic benefits, specifically as follows: Figure 1 As shown.

[0049] (1) Equipment construction cost: In the economic evaluation of the power heating network, the allocation of equipment construction cost needs to be combined with the capacity scale for full-cycle cost accounting, and finally the daily cost is obtained. The specific calculation is as follows:

[0050] ① Unit investment cost of equipment: defined as the initial investment cost corresponding to a unit of equipment capacity, the specific formula is as follows:

[0051]

[0052] ② Total annual investment based on capacity: The total investment in equipment needs to be determined based on the annual processing capacity and the investment cost per unit capacity.

[0053] Total equipment investment (yuan) = Annual processing capacity × Unit investment cost (yuan / standard cubic meter) (2)

[0054] The formula for calculating annual processing capacity is as follows:

[0055] Annual processing capacity = Equipment capacity (standard cubic meters / hour) × Annual operating hours × Load factor (3)

[0056] ③ Annual depreciation cost: Depreciation cost is allocated to the useful life of the equipment based on the net value after deducting the residual value from the original value.

[0057]

[0058] The residual value rate is usually 5%, and the depreciation period is determined according to the type of equipment. For electrochemical equipment, it is usually 10-15 years, and for thermal equipment, it is 20-30 years.

[0059] ④ Annual operation and maintenance cost: The operation and maintenance cost is extracted as a fixed percentage of the total investment in equipment.

[0060] Annual maintenance cost (yuan / year) = Total equipment investment × Maintenance coefficient (5)

[0061] The operation and maintenance coefficient reflects the proportion of annual operation and maintenance costs to the original value of the equipment (1.5%-5%).

[0062] ⑤ Daily cost allocation: The total annual cost is allocated to the daily operating cost.

[0063]

[0064] (2) Line loss rate: It reflects the use of electricity at high, medium and low voltage levels and is a description of the operation level of the distribution network. The specific formula is as follows.

[0065]

[0066] (3) Cost per unit line length: This is a cost-type indicator that reflects the average cost level of line equipment in a certain area. The calculation formula is as follows.

[0067]

[0068] (4) Cost per unit transformer capacity: This reflects the average cost of transformer equipment in a certain area. However, its scope of application differs from that of cost per unit line length. The cost per unit line length index applies to lines of all levels, while the cost per unit transformer capacity only applies to power grids above 10KV. The calculation formula is shown below.

[0069]

[0070] (5) Power supply load per unit asset: This is the ratio of the power supply load of the power grid at the end of the statistical period to the total amount of power grid assets at the end of the statistical period. The formula is as follows.

[0071]

[0072] (6) Input-output ratio: This is a benefit-type indicator, which is the ratio of input to output. The larger the ratio, the greater the economic benefit. The specific calculation formula is as follows.

[0073]

[0074] The operating revenue involved in the formula consists of three components: sales revenue, electricity purchase cost, and operation and maintenance cost. The formula is further explained below.

[0075]

[0076] (7) Energy purchase cost

[0077]

[0078] in, These are electricity price, gas price, electricity purchase volume, and gas purchase volume, respectively.

[0079] (8) Cost of curtailed electricity

[0080]

[0081] Where, α WT P WT,lost (t) represents the unit power curtailment penalty cost coefficient and the amount of power curtailed during time period t, respectively.

[0082] 2. Energy efficiency indicators

[0083] In the construction and operation of power and heating networks in industrial parks, comprehensive benefits such as energy conservation, environmental improvement, enhanced heating quality, and increased power supply should be considered. According to national energy and environmental protection policies, industrial parks should optimize fuel supply schemes for combined heat and power (CHP) based on energy supply conditions and the requirements for optimizing the energy structure, focusing on improving environmental quality, conserving energy, and enhancing heating quality. Specifically, for example... Figure 2 As shown.

[0084] (1) Overall thermal efficiency

[0085]

[0086] (2) Thermoelectric ratio

[0087]

[0088] For thermal power units with a single unit capacity of less than 50 MW, the annual average heat-to-power ratio should be greater than 100%; for thermal power units with a single unit capacity of 50 MW to less than 200 MW, the annual average heat-to-power ratio should be greater than 50%; for extraction-condensing dual-purpose heating units with a single unit capacity of 200 MW and above, the heat-to-power ratio during the heating season should be greater than 50%.

[0089] (3) Energy output rate

[0090] The energy output rate is the ratio of the industrial added value of the industrial park to the total energy consumption. The higher this indicator is, the higher the energy output efficiency. Energy includes primary energy sources such as raw coal, crude oil, natural gas, nuclear power, hydropower, and wind power.

[0091]

[0092] (4) Renewable energy usage ratio

[0093] The renewable energy usage ratio is the ratio of renewable energy usage by industrial enterprises within the park to their total energy consumption. Renewable energy includes non-fossil energy sources such as solar, hydro, biomass, geothermal, hydrogen, and tidal energy.

[0094]

[0095] (5) Clean energy utilization rate

[0096] Clean energy utilization rate refers to the ratio of clean energy usage to total end-use energy consumption in the park, with all energy usage calculated in standard coal equivalent. Clean energy includes clean fuels such as natural gas, coke oven gas, other coal gases, refinery dry gas, and liquefied petroleum gas used for combustion, as well as electricity and clean fuels such as low-sulfur light diesel oil (excluding fuels for motor vehicles).

[0097]

[0098] (6) Waste heat recovery rate

[0099] Waste heat recovery and utilization rate refers to the proportion of waste heat that has been recovered and utilized out of the total waste heat resources in the industrial park. It is an important indicator reflecting the degree of waste heat recovery and utilization by enterprises. Waste heat recovery and utilization is the process of recovering and utilizing the heat energy contained in gaseous (such as high-temperature flue gas), liquid (such as cooling water), and solid (such as various high-temperature steels) substances discharged during the production process that have temperatures higher than ambient temperature. The amount of waste heat resources in the industrial park is calculated according to GB / T 1028.

[0100]

[0101] 3. Low-carbon and environmentally friendly indicators

[0102] In the construction and operation of power and heating networks in industrial parks, low-carbon and environmental protection indicators are mainly used to measure the comprehensive performance of the power grid and heating network in reducing carbon emissions, controlling pollutants, and utilizing renewable energy. These indicators not only reflect the environmental friendliness of the power and heating network system but also assess its specific effectiveness in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and environmental pollution. By evaluating the low-carbon and environmental protection performance of the power and heating network, the sustainable development of the park in its green energy transition can be promoted, further enhancing the scientific nature and effectiveness of environmental management.

[0103] In the low-carbon and environmentally friendly evaluation of power and heating networks, secondary indicators can include: carbon emission intensity, pollutant emissions, renewable energy utilization rate, carbon reduction benefits during the electrothermal conversion process, energy recovery and utilization rate, pollutant treatment and emission reduction efficiency, and overall environmental benefit ratio. These indicators not only focus on the carbon emissions and pollutant control of the power grid but also incorporate the performance of the heating network system in energy recovery and pollutant treatment. Through comprehensive analysis of these indicators, the optimized design and operation of the power and heating network system can be guided, ensuring that low-carbon industrial parks achieve low-carbon and environmentally friendly goals while minimizing negative environmental impacts and promoting green development and energy structure optimization. Specifically, for example... Figure 3 As shown.

[0104] (1) Carbon emission intensity

[0105] At the power plant, the CO2 emissions per unit of heat supplied, P CS (kg / GJ):

[0106]

[0107] In the formula, OF s This represents the carbon oxidation rate of coal combustion.

[0108] At the gas-fired peak-shaving heating station, the CO2 emission P per unit of heat supplied is... g (kg / GJ):

[0109]

[0110] In the formula, OF g This represents the carbon oxidation rate of coal combustion.

[0111] At an electrically driven, high-temperature-difference heat exchanger, the CO2 emission P per unit of heat supplied is... a (kg / GJ):

[0112]

[0113] Therefore, the CO2 emissions per unit of heat supplied by the system

[0114]

[0115] (2) Wind power utilization rate

[0116]

[0117] Among them, P WT,lost (t) represents the amount of wind power wasted (power loss) during time period t. η represents the wind power output during time period t, i.e., the theoretical power generation of wind power. lost This indicates the wind power utilization rate.

[0118] (3) Annual reduction in non-renewable energy consumption, reflecting the annual reduction in non-renewable energy consumption.

[0119]

[0120] In the formula, W RGi The annual energy supply of the i-th renewable energy source within the integrated energy system.

[0121] (4) Annual reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, reflecting the annual reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.

[0122]

[0123] In the formula, F SC For carbon-containing energy savings in the energy internet energy system; C SC This refers to the carbon dioxide emissions generated per ton of standard coal used in power generation.

[0124] (5) Annual reduction in sulfur dioxide emissions, reflecting the annual reduction in sulfur dioxide emissions.

[0125]

[0126] In the formula, F SS For the amount of sulfur-containing energy saved by the energy internet energy system; C SS This refers to the sulfur dioxide emissions generated per ton of standard coal used in power generation.

[0127] (6) Annual reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions, reflecting the annual reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions.

[0128]

[0129] In the formula, F SN For carbon-containing energy savings in the energy internet energy system; C SN This refers to the carbon dioxide emissions generated per ton of standard coal used in power generation.

[0130] (7) Air quality compliance rate (%)

[0131] Using the relative humidity and pollutant content of a typical day, the compliance rate of air quality in the factory at a certain moment is calculated. The sampling interval can be 1 hour. The expression is:

[0132]

[0133] In the formula, F air Air quality compliance; T air The time when air quality meets the acceptable standard; T all This represents the total running time.

[0134] 4. Safety Indicators

[0135] In the construction and operation of electric heating networks in industrial parks, safety indicators are used to assess the reliability, stability, and emergency response capabilities of the power grid and heating network. These safety indicators not only cover the normal operation of the power grid and heating network system but also involve equipment failure rate, durability, and emergency response capabilities, thereby ensuring the safe and stable operation of the entire electric heating network system. By evaluating the safety of the electric heating network, the park's ability to respond to emergencies such as natural disasters and equipment failures can be enhanced, improving the overall safety level of the project.

[0136] In the safety evaluation of electric heating networks, secondary indicators can include: system stability, equipment safety, failure rate and maintenance rate, equipment durability, emergency response time and efficiency, safety assurance capabilities during electrothermal conversion, and the effectiveness of the overall system's emergency plan. These indicators not only assess the safety of the power grid system but also consider the safe operation performance of the heating network under high temperature and high pressure conditions. Through comprehensive analysis of these indicators, the design and operational safety of the electric heating network system can be effectively improved, ensuring that low-carbon industrial parks can continuously and stably provide energy services during operation and possess the ability to respond quickly and effectively to emergencies, thus guaranteeing the safe production and operation of the park. Specifically, for example... Figure 4 As shown.

[0137] (1) Voltage qualification rate

[0138] Safety indicators are primarily measured using voltage qualification rates, which are categorized into four types—A, B, C, and D—based on different user priorities. However, the applicability of these four types differs depending on the voltage level. Types A and B voltage qualification rates are applicable to high-voltage distribution networks, while types C and D are applicable to medium- and low-voltage distribution networks. The specific calculation formula for the voltage qualification rate indicator is shown below.

[0139]

[0140] Where V A V B V C V D These represent the voltage qualification rates for categories A, B, C, and D, respectively.

[0141] (2) System fault location accuracy

[0142] This refers to the accuracy of the system decision-making level's diagnosis of heating network faults through data measurement and analysis compared to the actual heating network faults.

[0143]

[0144] In the formula, γ1 represents the correct number of fault events occurring in the decision center diagnostic system. This represents the number of actual system failure events (in the number of times).

[0145] (3) Equipment loss

[0146] Equipment loss indicators include equipment loss costs and energy conversion rate, where the energy conversion rate is the ratio between the total system load demand and the energy supply from the upstream network within a scheduling cycle.

[0147]

[0148] In the formula, These are the calorific value of natural gas, the calorific value of hydrogen, and the maximum output of wind power, respectively.

[0149] (4) Smart meter installation rate

[0150] The percentage of all electricity users with smart meters installed in the entire system is given by the formula below. A higher percentage indicates a better interaction between the electricity user and the power grid.

[0151]

[0152] (5) Application rate of smart heat meters

[0153] A smart heat meter is a water-based heat measurement instrument. Its display screen shows basic information such as operating time and current date, as well as heating information such as supply and return water temperatures, supply and return water temperature difference, and cumulative heat (flow). Heating companies install this metering and communication equipment at the user's end to enable two-way communication. This indicator reflects the data interaction capabilities of a smart heating network project.

[0154]

[0155] (6) Coverage of electricity information collection system

[0156] The coverage rate of the electricity information collection system represents the proportion of electricity users who report their own electricity consumption information to the information collection system to the total number of electricity users. It reflects the information interaction capability between the power grid and electricity users. The formula is as follows.

[0157]

[0158] (7) Customer service information system coverage

[0159] Customer service information system coverage rate represents the proportion of users who use the customer service information system to resolve problems encountered when their own power consumption is abnormal or other situations occur, and the formula is as follows.

[0160]

[0161] Secondly, a comprehensive benefit evaluation method is established. Based on the indicator evaluation system, the indicators with the greatest impact on low-carbon industrial parks are selected from four dimensions: economy, safety, low-carbon environmental protection, and energy conservation. The indicator weights, superior-inferiority distances, indicator correlations, and comprehensive evaluation scores are calculated using entropy weight-TOPSIS-grey relational analysis. The evaluation process is as follows: Figure 5 .

[0162] 1) Data forwarding and standardization

[0163] Considering the different data types of the indicator system, in order to unify the quantification, the extremely small data is positiveized, and the specific formula is shown in equation (39).

[0164]

[0165] In the formula, For the positive transformation of extremely small data, x i For extremely small datasets; max(x) is the maximum number in the dataset.

[0166] Then the positive data is standardized to obtain matrix Y, which is used to eliminate the influence of dimensions, as shown in equation (40).

[0167]

[0168] In the formula, Y ij For standardized data, a standardized matrix Y, x is formed by all standardized data. ij Let be the data in the i-th row and j-th column, that is, the value of the j-th indicator under the i-th evaluation object, where i∈n and j∈m.

[0169] 2) Define the maximum value Y of the index + With minimum value Y -

[0170] The optimal and worst distances are solved by defining the maximum and minimum values, as shown in equations (41)-(42).

[0171]

[0172]

[0173] In the formula, and The maximum and minimum values ​​in column j are respectively the maximum and minimum values. The above formula can be used to determine the ideal (optimal) value under the indicator system.

[0174] 3) Solving for indicator weights

[0175] Traditional TOPSIS method and grey relational model assume that the weights of each indicator are equal, but in practice, the importance of different indicators is different, and relevant calculations are required to obtain the results, as shown in equation (43).

[0176]

[0177] In the formula, e j E represents the information entropy of each indicator. j w is the information utility value. j For weights.

[0178] 4) Euclid optimal distance worst distance

[0179]

[0180] 5) Grey relational degree and

[0181]

[0182] 6) Overall progress C i

[0183]

[0184] The greater the progress of the application, the higher the overall score, and the greater the superiority of the corresponding low-carbon industrial park scenario; conversely, the smaller the progress of the application, the lower the superiority.

[0185] Since different indicators have varying importance in the overall benefits, a model is used to analyze the information entropy of each indicator to determine its weight in the evaluation process. This method can dynamically adjust the weights according to the actual situation, ensuring that the actual impact of each indicator is reflected more efficiently in the evaluation. Therefore, the principle for selecting indicator weights is based on the information content of each indicator and its contribution to the overall benefits, thereby ensuring the objectivity and accuracy of the assessment.

[0186] This invention proposes an evaluation index system for the operation of electric heating networks in industrial parks, based on four key dimensions: economy, energy saving, low carbon and environmental protection, and safety. The index system combines the TOPSIS method to evaluate the distance between each scheme and the ideal solution, and uses grey relational analysis to analyze the correlation between the indicators. Finally, it calculates the comprehensive progress score, quantitatively evaluates the comprehensive benefits of each scenario, and forms a complete comprehensive benefit evaluation process for electric heating networks in industrial parks. This provides a theoretical basis and methodological support for promoting the green and low carbon transformation of industrial parks.

[0187] To verify the effectiveness of the comprehensive evaluation model and method proposed in this application, a numerical example analysis was conducted with a 24-hour period as one cycle.

[0188] We improved the coupling model of C2H (coal-to-hydrogen) and P2G (electricity-to-gas) for high-temperature slag and constructed five different basic scenarios.

[0189] Scenario 1: Optimization and scheduling of IES (Integrated Energy System) in industrial parks considering traditional C2H (Continuous Energy to Hazard) architecture;

[0190] Scenario 2: Optimize scheduling of the IES system in an industrial park for C2H improvement using high-temperature slag;

[0191] Scenario 3: Optimize scheduling of IES systems in industrial parks that couple traditional C2H and P2G;

[0192] Scenario 4: Consider improving the scheduling of the IES system in an industrial park that couples C2H and P2G processes using high-temperature slag;

[0193] Scenario 5: Optimize the scheduling of the IES system in an industrial park to improve the coupling of C2H and P2G in high-temperature slag and the reaction of CO2 with high-temperature slag.

[0194] A cost comparison analysis was conducted for the above five scenarios, and the specific data is shown in Table 1.

[0195] Table 1 Comparison of Optimized Scheduling Results for Scenarios 1-5

[0196]

[0197] Scenario 1 and 3 use traditional C2H systems. The lack of heat from the high-temperature slag necessitates additional heating from the heating system, leading to high output from the gas-to-heat equipment and increased gas costs. Scenario 5 additionally considers the reaction between CaO and CO2 in the high-temperature slag. This not only provides additional heat to C2H but also absorbs some of the CO2 produced during the C2H process, reducing the gas-to-heat output and thus lowering gas costs. The gas purchase cost in Scenario 5 is reduced by 45.9%, 25.9%, 36.1%, and 4.4% compared to the other scenarios, respectively. Furthermore, the H2 production in Scenario 5 is 2540.34 m³ higher than in the other four scenarios. 3 1782.03m 3 1947.03m 3 742.18m 3 .

[0198] If scenarios 1 and 2 do not participate in P2G, the CO2 provided by MR will be less, and the amount of natural gas produced will also be reduced, leading to an increase in gas purchase costs. However, the CO2 emitted by C2H will lead to an overall increase in the system's carbon emissions. In order to reduce carbon trading costs, the amount of C2H reaction can only be reduced. Although this reduces the amount of coal purchased, it also increases the overall total operating cost, which runs counter to the green transformation of coal.

[0199] Scenario 4, an improvement to C2H, uses high-temperature slag as a catalyst and heat source, leading to increased coal consumption and higher carbon emissions and carbon trading costs. The carbon trading costs in Scenario 4 are 21.2%, 14.2%, and 17.9% higher than in Scenarios 1-3, respectively, with corresponding increases in carbon emissions and coal consumption of 20.8%, 15.4%, and 17.8% and 21.2%, 14.2%, and 17.9%, respectively. While Scenario 4 provides more H2 production, it also leads to increased carbon emissions and carbon trading costs. Scenario 5, an improvement, reduces carbon emissions and carbon trading costs. Although coal consumption is still higher than in other scenarios, it provides some insights into the green transformation of C2H and green coal use.

[0200] Although the daily construction cost of Scenario 5 increased to RMB 4,125.68 due to the addition of CO2 processing equipment, its total operating cost was reduced by 28.6%, 16.3%, 21.3%, and 8.0% respectively compared to the other four scenarios through the combination of tiered carbon trading mechanism and green coal technology, providing a feasible path for the low-carbon transformation of coal-based energy systems.

[0201] According to the processing Figure 6 , Figure 7 The diagram shows the overall scores for different scenarios and the indicator weights for the optimal scenario. The overall score quantifies the comprehensive benefits of the industrial park's power and heating network under different scenarios. Calculated using the entropy-weighted TOPSIS-grey relational model, scenario 5 has the highest overall score, followed by scenario 4. This result reflects that scenario 5 performs well in many aspects and is more in line with the development needs of low-carbon industrial parks.

[0202] In terms of economic indicators, although the construction cost of Scenario 5 is higher than other scenarios, the total operating cost is relatively lower. Expenses such as electricity and gas purchase costs are effectively controlled; for example, the gas purchase cost is only 4867.13 yuan. This is due to its optimized energy allocation and operation strategy, resulting in higher resource utilization efficiency and reducing unnecessary economic input. From an environmental perspective, Scenario 5's actual carbon emissions are 15.96 tons, which is relatively low, indicating significant achievements in reducing carbon emissions and achieving low-carbon development, which is crucial for responding to the "dual carbon" target. Regarding equipment loss indicators, Scenario 5 may perform well in equipment selection and maintenance management, reducing equipment loss costs and ensuring stable system operation. While Scenario 4's overall score is slightly lower than Scenario 5, it also has commendable aspects, providing a reference direction for further optimization.

[0203] like Figure 7As shown, the weights of different indicators were determined through the evaluation of Scenario 5, which is of great significance for clarifying the importance of each indicator in the comprehensive benefit evaluation. Among the tertiary indicators, carbon emissions have the highest weight. This fully demonstrates that carbon emissions have the most critical impact on comprehensive benefits in the construction and operation of low-carbon industrial parks. In the current context of the world actively addressing climate change and vigorously promoting "dual-carbon" goals, reducing carbon emissions has become one of the core tasks for the sustainable development of industrial parks. Therefore, controlling carbon emissions has become a key focus for improving the comprehensive benefits of industrial parks.

[0204] From the perspective of secondary indicators, environmental indicators have the highest impact, followed by economic indicators. This indicates that environmental protection has become an indispensable and crucial factor in the development of industrial parks, even surpassing the influence of economic factors to some extent. This compels industrial parks to place greater emphasis on optimizing environmental indicators during planning and operation. For example, improving C2H conversion efficiency can not only reduce carbon emissions and achieve environmental goals, but may also bring about increased economic benefits by improving energy utilization efficiency, achieving a win-win situation for both the environment and the economy. At the same time, the role of economic indicators cannot be ignored; a balance needs to be struck between environmental protection and economic considerations to achieve the long-term stable development of the park.

[0205] The foregoing has shown and described the basic principles, main features, and advantages of the present invention. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that the present invention is not limited to the details of the above exemplary embodiments, and that the present invention can be implemented in other specific forms without departing from the spirit or basic features of the present invention.

[0206] Therefore, the embodiments should be regarded as exemplary and non-limiting in all respects, and the scope of the invention is defined by the appended claims rather than the foregoing description. Thus, it is intended that all variations falling within the meaning and scope of the equivalents of the claims be included within the invention.

[0207] Furthermore, it should be understood that although this specification describes embodiments, not every embodiment contains only one independent technical solution. This narrative style is merely for clarity. Those skilled in the art should consider the specification as a whole, and the technical solutions in each embodiment can also be appropriately combined to form other embodiments that can be understood by those skilled in the art.

Claims

1. An evaluation method for the construction and operation of electric heating networks in industrial parks, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: An evaluation index system is constructed from four dimensions: economy, energy saving, low carbon and environmental protection, and safety. The evaluation index system includes economic indicators, energy saving indicators, low carbon and environmental protection indicators, and safety indicators. Based on the aforementioned evaluation index system, the data of the indicators that have the greatest impact on low-carbon industrial parks are selected from four dimensions: economy, safety, low-carbon environmental protection, and energy conservation. After standardization, the superior-inferiority distance and grey relational degree determined by the index weights are calculated based on the standardized data using the entropy weight-TOPSIS-grey relational degree method. Then, the comprehensive application progress is solved based on the superior-inferiority distance and grey relational degree. The comprehensive application progress is ranked according to its score, and the construction and operation of the industrial park's electric heating network are comprehensively evaluated based on the ranking and weights.

2. The evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park electric heating network according to claim 1, characterized in that, When analyzing and processing indicator data, the indicator data is first quantified uniformly, the extremely small data is positiveized, and then the positiveized data is standardized to obtain a standardized matrix, which is then solved.

3. The evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park electric heating network according to claim 1, characterized in that, The overall patching progress is represented by C. i The equations to be solved include: in, These represent the optimal and worst distances in Euclid, respectively. and ω represents the corresponding positive and negative gray correlation, indicating the correlation with the optimal and worst ideal values; D ω R These represent the corresponding overall weights.

4. The evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park electric heating network according to claim 3, characterized in that, The positive and negative gray correlation degrees are solved by the following equation: in, and Y represents the maximum and minimum data in the i-th column of the standardized matrix, respectively. ij To standardize data, denoted as the corresponding index weights in the grey relational degree calculation, and ρ is the resolution coefficient.

5. The evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park electric heating network according to claim 4, characterized in that, The Euclid optimal and worst distances are calculated by defining the maximum and minimum values ​​in the normalized matrix, and then solving for these values, including: and w represents the maximum and minimum data in column j of the standardized matrix. j As the indicator weight; 6. The evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park electric heating network according to claim 5, characterized in that, The weights of the indicators are calculated using the following equation: Among them, e j E represents the information entropy of each indicator. j This represents the information utility value.

7. The evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park electric heating network according to claim 1, characterized in that, The economic indicators include equipment construction cost, line loss rate, cost per unit line length, input-output ratio, cost per unit transformer capacity, energy purchase cost, power supply load per unit asset, and cost of curtailed electricity. Among them, equipment construction costs include unit investment cost of equipment, total annual investment based on capacity, annual processing capacity, annual depreciation cost, annual operation and maintenance cost, and daily cost allocation; Among them, energy purchase cost is the sum of electricity and gas purchase costs; Among them, the cost of abandoned electricity is α WT P WT,lost (t) represents the unit power curtailment penalty cost coefficient and the amount of power curtailed during time period t, respectively.

8. The evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park electric heating network according to claim 1, characterized in that, The energy efficiency indicators include total thermal efficiency, heat-to-power ratio, energy output rate, renewable energy utilization rate, clean energy utilization rate, and waste heat resource recovery and utilization rate.

9. The evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park electric heating network according to claim 1, characterized in that, The low-carbon and environmentally friendly indicators include carbon emission intensity, wind power utilization rate, annual reduction in non-renewable energy consumption, annual reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, annual reduction in sulfur dioxide emissions, annual reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions, and air quality compliance. Carbon emission intensity is calculated using the following formula: in, P represents the CO2 emissions per unit of heat supplied by the system. a P represents the CO2 emissions per unit heat supplied by an electrically operated, high-temperature-difference heat exchanger. g P represents the CO2 emissions per unit of heat supplied at a gas-fired peak-shaving heating station. CS OF represents the CO2 emissions per unit of heat supplied at a power plant. s For the carbon oxidation rate of coal combustion, OF g b represents the carbon oxidation rate of coal combustion. CS b a b g ρ g These represent the emission coefficient and heat loss coefficient for the corresponding unit of heat supply, respectively.

10. The evaluation method for the construction and operation of the industrial park electric heating network according to claim 1, characterized in that, The safety indicators include voltage qualification rate, system fault location accuracy rate, equipment loss, smart meter installation rate, smart heat meter application rate, electricity consumption information collection system coverage rate, and customer service information system coverage rate. The voltage qualification rate includes the voltage qualification rate of different users' electricity consumption and the comprehensive voltage qualification rate obtained based on the voltage qualification rate of different users' electricity consumption. The equipment loss includes equipment loss cost and energy conversion rate. The energy conversion rate is the ratio between the total system load demand and the energy supply of the upper-level network within a scheduling cycle. In the formula, I energy Indicates energy conversion rate, These are the calorific value of natural gas, the calorific value of hydrogen, and the maximum wind power output, respectively. These are the electricity consumption for electrical load, the heat consumption for thermal load, the gas consumption, and the hydrogen consumption. These are the electricity and gas purchased from external sources, respectively.

Images