gxceed
← 論文一覧に戻る

<b>Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen</b> <b>Production Pathways Across Canada: Evaluating Methane Pyrolysis</b> <b>as a Transitional Low-Carbon </b><b>Solution</b>

ライフサイクルアセスメントによるカナダの水素製造経路の比較：メタン熱分解を低炭素移行ソリューションとして評価 (AI 翻訳)

Nika Rezaei, Sylvia Sleep

Peer Beyond Graduate Research Conference📚 査読済 / ジャーナル2026-05-19#水素Origin: Global
DOI: 10.55016/8qptmf78
原典: https://doi.org/10.55016/8qptmf78

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

この研究は、カナダにおける水素製造経路のライフサイクルアセスメントを実施し、メタン熱分解、電解、SMR-CCSを比較。メタン熱分解は固体炭素を生成し収益源となる可能性があるが、炭素市場の安定性が課題。クリーンな電力網では溶融金属水素燃焼型熱分解と電解が低GHG排出を達成。

English

This study conducts a cradle-to-gate LCA of hydrogen production pathways in Canada, comparing methane pyrolysis, electrolysis, and SMR-CCS. Methane pyrolysis produces solid carbon instead of CO2, enabling potential revenue streams, but requires stable carbon markets. Under clean grids, molten-metal hydrogen-fired pyrolysis and electrolysis achieve the lowest GHG emissions.

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

カナダの水素LCA研究は、日本が検討するメタン熱分解などの水素製造技術の環境影響評価に示唆を与える。特に固体炭素の副産物価値や水使用量の比較は、日本の水素戦略立案に役立つ。

In the global GX context

This paper contributes to global hydrogen LCA literature by evaluating methane pyrolysis across Canadian provinces. It highlights the importance of grid emissions and water footprint, and the potential of methane pyrolysis to produce valuable solid carbon, relevant for countries considering diverse hydrogen pathways.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:Provides a comprehensive LCA comparison that can inform future hydrogen pathway studies.

🏢実務担当者:Companies in hydrogen production or carbon markets can use the results to assess viability of methane pyrolysis.

🏛政策担当者:Policymakers can consider trade-offs between water use and emissions when setting hydrogen standards.

📄 Abstract（原文）

Hydrogen is increasingly viewed as a central component of Canada’s long‑term decarbonization strategy, especially in sectors where direct electrification remains challenging. As provinces work to cut emissions while maintaining reliable energy systems, understanding the life‑cycle impacts of emerging hydrogen pathways has become essential. This study applies an ISO 14040/14044‑aligned, cradle‑to‑gate life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare methane pyrolysis with electrolysis and steam methane reforming with carbon capture and storage (SMR-CCS). Three methane pyrolysis configurations, molten‑metal gas‑fired, molten‑metal hydrogen‑fired, and plasma‑based, are evaluated using provincial electricity grid data, upstream natural gas emissions, and established LCA databases. Results show that molten‑metal hydrogen‑fired pyrolysis and electrolysis generally achieve the lowest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in provinces with clean electricity. Plasma‑based pyrolysis performs well only under very low‑carbon grids due to its high electricity demand. Water use also varies, molten‑metal gas‑fired pyrolysis has the lowest national water footprint, while electrolysis and plasma systems show higher water use in fossil‑intensive regions. A key distinction of methane pyrolysis is its production of solid carbon rather than CO₂, creating potential revenue streams. Plasma systems typically yield carbon black, while molten‑metal reactors can produce higher‑value graphitic carbon. However, long‑term feasibility depends on the development of stable carbon markets.

🔗 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。