Cost-Benefit Analysis of Low-Carbon Mobility Solutions
低炭素モビリティソリューションの費用便益分析 (AI 翻訳)
Deepak Gupta, Ergashev Nuriddin Gayratovich, Mirzaev Abdullaevich, Davlatova Toshpulatovna, Yarmatov Sharofiddin, Begimov Uktam
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本分析は、電気自動車、水素燃料電池車、公共交通、自転車等の低炭素モビリティについて、ライフサイクル評価と社会的炭素コストを考慮した費用便益分析を実施。結果、電気自動車と公共交通は便益費用比が高く、自転車や徒歩は混雑緩和や健康向上など高い副次的効果を示した。
English
This chapter presents a cost-benefit analysis of low-carbon mobility options using life-cycle assessment and social cost of carbon. Battery electric vehicles and public transit show benefit-cost ratios above unity, while active transport yields high co-benefits in congestion reduction and public health.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
In the global GX context
This paper provides a global synthesis of cost-benefit evidence for low-carbon mobility, relevant for transport decarbonization strategies under the Paris Agreement. It highlights the importance of monetizing externalities in policy decisions, aligning with ISSB and TCFD frameworks for climate risk disclosure.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Offers a comprehensive CBA framework integrating LCA and SCC for multiple mobility options, useful for further modeling and policy evaluation.
🏢実務担当者:Provides evidence for corporate fleet decarbonization decisions, including TCO and co-benefit comparisons across BEVs, FCEVs, and public transit.
🏛政策担当者:Demonstrates that BEVs and public transit have high social returns, supporting infrastructure subsidies and carbon pricing mechanisms.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Transport is responsible for approximately 24% of global CO2 emissions, making it a critical sector for decarbonization. This chapter presents a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of low-carbon mobility solutions, including battery electric vehicles (BEVs), hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCEVs), public transit systems, and active transport modes such as cycling and walking. Drawing on life-cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies, total cost of ownership (TCO) models, and estimates of the social cost of carbon (SCC), the analysis quantifies both the private and social returns to low-carbon investment. Evidence suggests that BEVs and public transit deliver benefit-cost ratios significantly above unity when externalities are monetized, while active transport yields some of the highest co-benefits through reduced congestion, improved public health, and lower infrastructure costs.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-9003-1.ch008first seen 2026-05-17 05:24:33
🔔 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。