【摘要】 为支撑“碳中和”愿景目标，火电行业在降低CO₂排放的前提下，还需进一步评估不同减排技术路径的减排潜力与经济性，以实现火电行业的近零排放甚至净零排放。本文系统梳理了包括生物质燃烧、绿氨燃烧、富氧燃烧与燃烧后碳捕集等4种典型的碳减排技术路径，概括其技术特点与发展现状，并对不同技术的发展难点进行分析。从全周期全链条角度出发研究碳足迹，探究4种减排技术路径的碳减排潜力。富氧燃烧和燃烧后碳捕集技术的减排率约为60%～80%；生物质燃烧与绿氨燃烧从源头避免了含碳燃料煤炭的利用，具有最低的碳排放量的特征，相比传统火电可降低碳排放量90%以上，减排潜力显著。从碳足迹角度出发，从技术成熟度和经济性角度考虑，绿氨燃烧发电目前处于小规模示范阶段，距离大规模商业应用尚有差距，由于绿氨制备成本高昂，导致发电成本与减排成本较为昂贵；生物质发电在国际上已经具备大规模示范项目，但由于燃料成本偏高导致发电成本较高；富氧燃烧技术仍缺乏大规模商业应用项目支撑，技术成熟度相对较低。燃烧后碳捕集技术成熟度最高且项目实践经验丰富，平准化度电成本最低，其减排成本约222.7～593.6元/tCO₂，在发电成本与减排成本等方面具有显著优势，生物质电厂平准化度电成本约为传统火电的两倍，约为0.68～0.75元/（k W·h），而绿氨电厂由于高成本绿氢导致燃料成本高昂，现阶段平准化度电成本约1.67元/（kW·h），随可再生能源发展和绿氢成本下降，绿氨电厂平准化度电成本有望降至0.9元/（k W·h），燃烧后碳捕集技术在当前技术中表现出最高的可行性与经济性。为实现碳中和目标，4种减排技术应有序推进，优先开展燃烧后捕集、生物质燃烧等技术成熟度较高的减排技术快速、大规模的部署，以实现电力行业快速降碳，同时应稳步研发绿氨燃烧等减排潜力更强、更清洁的发电技术，为碳中和后期电力行业零碳足迹实现托底。更多还原

【Abstract】 As China progresses towards its carbon neutrality target, the current thermal power industry must not only reduce CO2 emissions but also further evaluate the potential and economic feasibility of various emission reduction technologies to achieve near-zero or even net-zero emissions in the high-emission power sector. This article systematically reviewed four typical emission reduction technologies currently in use: biomass power generation, green ammonia power generation, oxy-fuel power generation, and post-combustion carbon capture. It outlined the technical characteristics and development status of these four paths and analyzes the challenges each technology faces. From a lifecycle perspective, the carbon reduction potential of these four emission reduction technologies were explored.Pursuing a net-zero emission goal, the emission reduction rates of oxy-fuel and post-combustion carbon capture technologies are approximately 60-80%. In contrast, biomass and green ammonia power generation which avoid using fossil fuels at the source and have the lowest carbon emisson. Compared to traditional thermal power plants, the carbon emisson of these two technologies can be reduced by over 90%, indicating significant emission reduction potential.From carbon footprint prespective, considering technological maturity and economic feasibility, green ammonia power generation is currently at a small-scale demonstration stage and remains distant from large-scale commercial applications. The high cost of green ammonia production also results in expensive generation and emission reduction costs for green ammonia plants. Biomass power generation has demonstrated large-scale projects internationally but faces high generation costs due to higher fuel expenses. Oxy-fuel technology still lacks large-scale commercial application projects, indicating relatively lower technological maturity. Post-combustion carbon capture technology has the highest degree of maturity and rich project practical experience, the levelised kWh cost is the lowest, its abatement cost is about 222.7～593.6 yuan/tCO₂, which has significant advantages in terms of power generation cost and abatement cost, etc. The levelised kWh cost of biomass power plants is about twice that of traditional thermal power,about 0.68～0.75 yuan/（kW·h）, while green ammonia power plants have a significant advantage due to the high cost of Green hydrogen leads to high fuel cost, the levelised kWh cost is about 1.67 yuan/（kW·h） at this stage, with the development of renewable energy and the decrease of green hydrogen cost, the levelised kWh cost of green ammonia plant is expected to be reduced to 0.9 yuan/（kW·h）, the post-combustion carbon capture technology shows the highest feasibility and economy among current technologies. In order to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality, the four emission reduction technologies should be promoted in an orderly manner, with priority given to the rapid, large-scale deployment of post-combustion carbon capture, biomass combustion, and other emission reduction technologies with higher technological maturity to achieve rapid carbon reduction in the power sector, while green ammonia combustion and other power generation technologies with stronger and cleaner emission reduction potential should be steadily developed to provide a backstop for the realisation of a zero-carbon footprint for the power sector in the later stages of carbon neutrality.更多还原