Optimal Pathways for E-Fuel Production from Renewable Sources: A Techno-Economic Comparison of Green Hydrogen and Synthetic Methane
再生可能エネルギー由来のE-Fuel生産の最適経路：グリーン水素と合成メタンの技術経済比較 (AI 翻訳)
Christian Trovò, Vito Introna, Annalisa Santolamazza, Stefano Mazzoni
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
イタリア南部の18.8MW再生可能エネルギーパークを対象に、グリーン水素と合成メタンの生産コストを最適化モデルで比較。水素のLCOHは9.55〜10.27€/kg、合成メタンは5.67€/kgCH4で、エネルギー単位では水素が競争的。系統接続10MW以上でバッテリー不要となりコスト低減。
English
This study compares green hydrogen and synthetic methane production from an 18.8 MW renewable park in southern Italy using a MILP optimization. Hydrogen LCOH ranges 9.55-10.27 €/kg, while synthetic methane is 5.67 €/kgCH4; on an energy basis, hydrogen is more competitive. A grid connection above 10 MW eliminates the need for battery and reduces 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
日本では水素基本戦略やGX基本方針に基づき、水素サプライチェーン構築が進む。本論文の技術経済分析は、国内の再エネ水素プロジェクトのコスト評価や系統連系の設計に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
This paper provides a robust techno-economic framework for green hydrogen and e-fuel production, relevant to global efforts on hydrogen deployment and sector coupling. The cost comparison and sensitivity analysis offer insights for project developers and policymakers under the ISSB and transition finance context.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a detailed optimization model and cost benchmarks for green hydrogen and synthetic methane production.
🏢実務担当者:Useful for assessing the economic viability of renewable hydrogen projects and optimizing system design.
🏛政策担当者:Informs policy on renewable hydrogen subsidies and infrastructure planning.
📄 Abstract（原文）
The present work proposes a holistic techno-economic framework for the production of green hydrogen and synthetic methane from a dedicated 18.8 MW renewable park (13.8 MW wind and 5 MW photovoltaic) in southern Italy. A Mixed-Integer Linear Programme optimises the hourly dispatch of the electrolyser, the battery, and the bi-directional grid connection over a full-year horizon (8760 h) while meeting an annual target of 600,000 kgH2. Two downstream pathways are compared: compressed-hydrogen transport by tube trailer at 200, 400, and 600 km, and on-site catalytic methanation via the Sabatier reaction. The assessment is deliberately restricted to the cost side, so that the two carriers are compared on a robust, price-agnostic levelised cost basis. Operated in an import-free mode to guarantee hydrogen with zero operational carbon emissions, the optimisation co-determines a cost-optimal battery capacity of 18 MWh. The levelised cost of hydrogen (LCOH) ranges between 9.55 and 10.27 €/kgH2 at the gate, rising to 11.17–12.33 €/kgH2 with transport, whereas the levelised cost of synthetic methane is 5.67 €/kgCH4. On an energy basis, hydrogen is more competitive (0.335–0.370 €/kWh) compared to methane (0.409 €/kWh). A structured sensitivity analysis shows that a grid connection of 10 MW or more renders the battery unnecessary and lowers the gate LCOH to 8.26 €/kg, and ranks the renewable CAPEX and the discount rate as the dominant cost drivers. The produced hydrogen is essentially carbon-free at the gate, with the only residual emissions (0.014–0.041 kgCO2/kWh) arising from its diesel trucking.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.3390/en19153544first seen 2026-07-31 06:43:19 · last seen 2026-08-02 06:22:33
🔔 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。