STIBバス車両の脱炭素化：バッテリー電気バスと水素燃料電池バスの多基準比較
Decarbonizing STIB Bus Fleet: A Multi-Criteria Comparison of Battery Electric and Hydrogen Fuel Cell Buses (原題)
Wolf DD, Westeinde MV, Qu C
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
ブリュッセルの公共交通機関STIBを対象に、バッテリー電気バス（BEB）と水素燃料電池バス（FCEB）の脱炭素化経路を、LCA、TCO、専門家インタビュー、MCDMを用いて比較評価。低炭素電力と再生可能水素の条件下ではFCEBの排出量が低いが、コスト面ではBEBが優位で、総合評価でもBEBが最適と結論。
English
This study evaluates battery electric buses (BEBs) versus hydrogen fuel cell buses (FCEBs) for Brussels' STIB transit agency using LCA, TCO, expert interviews, and multi-criteria analysis. FCEBs show lower emissions under renewable hydrogen, but BEBs are economically superior and more practical, making them the optimal near-term pathway.
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
日本のバス事業者や自治体がEV・水素バス導入を検討する際の評価枠組みとして参考になる。特にLCAとTCOを統合した多基準分析は、SSBJ開示や脱炭素計画策定にも応用可能。
In the global GX context
This study provides a replicable framework for transit agencies globally to compare EV and hydrogen pathways, aligning with TCFD/ISSB disclosure needs for climate transition planning. It offers empirical evidence on cost and emissions trade-offs relevant to sustainable transport policy.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a comprehensive multi-criteria framework for comparing bus technologies, useful for further research in transport decarbonization.
🏢実務担当者:Offers actionable insights for transit agencies evaluating fleet electrification options, including cost and operational considerations.
🏛政策担当者:Informs policy decisions on subsidizing EV vs. hydrogen infrastructure based on regional energy mix and cost data.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This study evaluates the optimal technological pathway for the Brussels Intercommunal Transport Company (STIB) to progressively decarbonize its urban surface transit fleet. A comprehensive, region-specific evaluation framework is developed, comparing Battery Electric Buses (BEBs) and Fuel Cell Electric Buses (FCEBs) across three key pillars: environmental performance, economic feasibility, and operational practicality. The methodology integrates a cradle-to-grave Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), a discounted Net Present Value Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) model, semi-structured interviews with transit engineering experts, and a final Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) matrix. The LCA results demonstrate that environmental benefits are highly contingent upon upstream energy pathways; under an optimized low-carbon Belgian electricity mix and renewable electrolysis, FCEBs achieve lower lifetime emissions than BEBs (0.21 versus 0.30kgCO2e/km), though this advantage is entirely neutralized if fossil-derived grey hydrogen is used. Conversely, the TCO analysis outlines a severe economic penalty for hydrogen fleets; over a 15-year design lifespan and 675,000 km of operation, BEBs achieve a standardized unit cost of 1.19bad hbox compared to 1.84bad hbox for FCEBs, a gap driven by current green hydrogen market price premiums relative to grid electricity. Empirical interview results confirm that BEBs exhibit superior localized practicality due to established infrastructure compatibility, mature depot electrification roadmaps, and high power supply reliability, which offset the FCEB’s theoretical advantages in range and refueling logistics. Finally, the multi-criteria analysis confirms that BEBs represent the optimal near-to-mid-term transition pathway for STIB, securing a global suitability score of 0.94 compared to 0.76 for FCEBs.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- Research Square https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202608.1444.v1first seen 2026-08-22 04:23:38 · last seen 2026-09-03 04:45:14
🔔 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。