← 論文一覧に戻る

Carbon capture, utilization, and storage in context : a multi-perspective assessment of CO2 utilization in products

Mariia Zhaurova

LUTPub (LUT University)ジャーナル2026-10-19#CCUS対象セクター: construction
原典: https://lutpub.lut.fi/handle/10024/173104

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

本論文はCCUSの35選択肢を多基準評価し、炭酸化コンクリート、ステンレススラグブロック、合成メタノール、合成ガソリンの4経路を製品レベル・システムレベルのLCAで比較した。全ての経路が適切なエネルギー条件下で排出削減を達成するが、評価レベルにより優劣の結論が変わりうることを示す。さらにCO2吸収量の増大が化石炭素代替の便益と原料制約を相反させること、便益・インセンティブがアクター間で不均等に分布しCO2排出源側に参加動機が乏しいことを明らかにした。

English

This dissertation applies multi-criteria evaluation to 35 CCUS options and product- vs system-level LCA to four pathways: carbonated concrete blocks, stainless steel slag blocks, synthetic methanol, and synthetic gasoline. All four achieve emission reductions under suitable energy conditions, but product- and system-level LCA can yield different conclusions on which pathway is preferable. It further shows that higher CO2 uptake trades fossil-carbon substitution benefits against feedstock constraints, and that benefits and incentives are unevenly distributed across actors, leaving CO2 sources with weak participation incentives.

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

CCUSは日本のGX実現に向けた成長分野別投資やエネルギー基本計画で重点領域とされ、合成燃料・コンクリート資材の脱炭素化は産業脱炭素の鍵となる。本論文の製品/システムLCAの視点差とアクター間インセンティブ設計の指摘は、日本企業がCCUS事業の妥当性評価やバリューチェーン連携を設計する際の実務的示唆に富む。

In the global GX context

As ISSB/CSRD disclosure increasingly demands Scope 3 and product-level emissions accounting, this work highlights that LCA boundary choices can flip conclusions about which CCUS pathway is preferable—a critical caveat for transition-finance and crediting decisions. Its actor-incentive analysis also speaks to the governance gap in voluntary carbon markets and CCUS value chains.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:CCUS経路のLCA境界設定と多基準評価の方法論的差異を整理する枠組みとして有用。

🏢実務担当者:CCUS関連製品の脱炭素効果を対外説明する際、製品/システムLCAの選択が結論を左右する点を認識すべき。

🏛政策担当者:CCUS普及にはCO2排出源側へのインセンティブ設計とバリューチェーン全体の便益配分調整が政策課題となる。

📄 Abstract（原文）

This dissertation evaluates carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) pathways to support the selection of suitable options for specific cases. It focuses on trade-offs and interdependencies across CCUS product categories, the conditions under which selected pathways outperform conventional alternatives in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, differences between product-level and system-level life cycle assessment (LCA), and the distribution of benefits and constraints among the actors in CCUS systems. A multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) is applied to assess 35 CCUS options against several criteria. LCA is then applied at the product and system levels to the selected pathways: carbonated concrete (CCon) blocks, stainless steel slag (SSS) blocks, synthetic methanol, and synthetic gasoline. The analysis is made in two contexts: industrial point source capture from a cement plant and direct air capture integrated into building ventilation. The MCE and LCA are complemented by an analysis of the CCUS value chain from different actors’ perspectives to examine how benefits, constraints, and regulatory conditions shape CCUS deployment. The results show three main patterns. First, CO2 uptake per unit of product links benefits and constraints in opposite directions. Higher uptake increases the potential for fossil carbon substitution but tightens feedstock constraints. Second, all four analyzed pathways achieve emission reductions under appropriate energy conditions, yet product-level and system-level LCA can lead to different conclusions about which pathway is preferable. This reflects different optimization problems, corresponding to the two objectives of CCUS: fossil carbon substitution and emission reduction. Third, benefits and incentives are distributed unevenly across actors in CCUS systems, and CO2 sources often lack incentives to participate. The dissertation concludes that differences in CCUS assessment are not only a methodological issue but also reflect the complexity of a multi-actor system in which different decision contexts and actor perspectives require different answers. Comprehensive CCUS assessment should therefore consider trade-offs, assessment perspectives, and the distribution of benefits and incentives among the actors involved.

🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース

🔔 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。