A review of prominent emerging technologies for atmospheric methane reduction
大気中メタン削減のための主要な新興技術のレビュー (AI 翻訳)
Tyoyima John Ayua, Musa Daboe
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本レビューは、メタン削減技術を発生源対策と大気除去に分類し、効率・スケーラビリティ・コストを比較。発生源対策（嫌気性消化、水管理）は30～90%削減を低コストで実現する一方、大気酸化技術は除去効率0.8～4.3%と不確実性が高い。最安は自然酸化シフトの強化（<2 USD/tCO2e）だが生態リスクあり。多様なポートフォリオが最適と結論。
English
This review compares methane mitigation technologies in source-based and atmospheric removal categories, evaluating efficiency, scalability, and cost. Source strategies (anaerobic digestion, rice-water management) achieve 30-90% reduction at low cost, while atmospheric oxidation techniques show removal efficiencies of 0.8-4.3% with higher uncertainty. The least-cost intervention is enhancing natural oxidative sinks (<2 USD/tCO2e) but with ecological risks. A diversified portfolio is recommended.
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
日本はGX実現に向けメタン削減目標を掲げる（農業・廃棄物分野など）。本レビューの技術比較は、日本が適切な対策を選択する際の参考となる。
In the global GX context
Methane is a key short-lived climate pollutant under the Paris Agreement. This review provides a structured comparison of mitigation options, informing national strategies and transition finance for methane reduction.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a comparative framework and cost data for emerging methane reduction technologies.
🏢実務担当者:Assists in selecting cost-effective methane mitigation options for facility-level deployment.
🏛政策担当者:Reinforces the need for a diversified portfolio combining source reduction and atmospheric removal.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Methane (CH 4 ) concentration will unavoidably exceed zero, even though the Paris Climate Agreement (PCA) mandates a rapid reduction in new greenhouse gas emissions to achieve net zero by 2050. Because of its large sources, it is impossible to eliminate CH 4 from the environment; however, it might be possible to restore pre-industrial concentrations (0.7 ppm). This study presents a structured comparative review of emerging methane mitigation technologies, examining both source-based strategies and atmospheric removal approaches. About 246 peer-reviewed publications were screened using predefined inclusion criteria across major scientific databases. Technologies were evaluated based on removal efficiency, scalability, technological maturity, environmental risk, and cost implications. Source-based strategies such as anaerobic digestion and improved rice-water management demonstrate reduction potentials of 30–90% at relatively low implementation costs. Meanwhile, atmospheric oxidation techniques exhibit modeled removal efficiencies of 0.80–4.30% of global methane, with a 13–17% oxidation enhancement, though with higher uncertainty and governance challenges. The least-cost intervention identified is enhancement of natural oxidative sinks, estimated at < 2 USD per tCO 2 - equivalent under limited deployment conditions, albeit with unresolved ecological and health risks. The findings suggest that methane mitigation effectiveness depends strongly on regional emission profiles, governance capacity, and socio-economic conditions. It is recommended that a diversified portfolio combining source reduction with cautiously evaluated atmospheric removal technologies be adopted, as they offer the most feasible pathway toward CH 4 reduction and climate stabilization under Sustainable Development Goal-13.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-026-03915-1first seen 2026-07-13 05:00:15
🔔 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。