低濃度源からの触媒酸化によるメタン削減の技術経済評価
Techno-Economic Assessment for Methane Mitigation through Catalytic Oxidation from Low-Concentration Sources (原題)
Devesh Sathya Sri Sairam Sirigina, Sai Gokul Subraveti, Simon Roussanaly, Rahul Anantharaman, Shareq Mohd Nazir
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
低濃度メタン源（大気中2ppmから家畜舎・堆肥貯蔵の1vol%まで）を対象に、熱触媒酸化と光触媒酸化の2経路でメタン削減コストを試算した技術経済評価。削減コストは入口濃度に反比例し、熱触媒で52〜186,000ドル/t-CO2eq、光触媒で48〜239,000ドル/t-CO2eqと幅広く分布する。耐湿性触媒や安価な電力、太陽光利用可能性がコスト低減の鍵であり、GWPの時間軸設定もコスト評価に影響する。
English
Techno-economic assessment of methane mitigation from low-concentration sources (2 ppm ambient air to 1 vol% manure storage) via thermal and photocatalytic oxidation. Mitigation costs are inversely proportional to inlet concentration, ranging $52–186,000/t-CO2eq (thermal) and $48–239,000/t-CO2eq (photocatalytic). Cheap moisture-resistant catalysts, cheap electricity, and sunlight availability drive cost reductions; GWP time horizon also affects reported costs.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
メタンは短寿命だが強力な温室効果ガスであり、日本のGX推進・カーボンニュートラル戦略における非CO2温室効果ガス対策の重要性を示す。特に畜産・廃棄物分野の排出削減はScope 3やサプライチェーン排出量算定にも関連し、国内の削減技術投資判断に資する。
In the global GX context
Methane is a short-lived but potent GHG; this work informs non-CO2 mitigation strategies relevant to national climate targets and corporate Scope 3 accounting. It highlights that low-concentration methane abatement remains extremely costly, underscoring the need for policy support and innovation in agriculture and waste sectors.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:低濃度メタン削減のコスト構造とプロセス特性の感度を定量化した基準データを提供する。
🏢実務担当者:畜産・廃棄物分野の排出削減投資の費用対効果を検討する際の参考値となる。
🏛政策担当者:非CO2温室効果ガス対策の政策設計において、低濃度源対策の高コスト性と支援の必要性を示唆する。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Abstract Mitigating methane emissions is crucial to achieving climate targets by limiting the temperature rise by the end of the century. This study presents techno-economic estimates for methane mitigation from low-concentration sources by two catalytic routes: thermal and photocatalytic oxidation. Methane mitigation costs for inlet concentrations representative of ambient air (2 ppm), waste stream from an air separation unit (4 ppm), air close to wetlands (40 ppm), ventilation stables (300 ppm─highest reported concentration in the literature for stables), and manure storage (1 vol %) are reported. Mitigation costs (using GWP100:28) are inversely proportional to the inlet methane concentration and range between 52 and 186,000 \$/t-CO2eq in the thermal route and 48–239,000 \$/t-CO2eq in the photocatalytic route for the concentration ranges in this study. We studied the effect of different process-level characteristics on methane mitigation costs. Among other process characteristics, cheap moisture-resistant catalysts and cheap electricity can bring down the costs in the thermocatalytic route, while the availability of sunlight and higher catalytic activity are necessary for photocatalytic routes. Emissions related to electricity use will result in higher methane mitigation costs. Since methane is a short-lived gas in the atmosphere and gets converted to CO2, the assumption around the time frame for global warming potential will also affect the mitigation costs if the costs are reported per t-CO2eq mitigated.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.6c02071first seen 2026-11-08 04:44:57 · last seen 2026-11-14 04:43:50
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。