水素製造技術のライフサイクルアセスメント：環境影響とグリーンエネルギー移行への政策的含意に関する系統的レビュー
Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen Production Technologies: A Systematic Review of Environmental Impacts and Policy Implications for the Green Energy Transition (原題)
César Felipe Henao Villa, David Alberto García Arango, Luís Fernando Garcés Giraldo, José Alexander Velásquez Ochoa, Alejandro Valencia-Arías
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本レビューは、水素製造経路のLCA研究28件をPRISMA 2020に基づき統合し、環境性能・経済性・技術成熟度を同時評価。再生可能エネルギー由来の電解水素は低炭素電力の追加供給で最大の排出削減効果を発揮するが、化石燃料主体の系統ではその利点が失われる。地域の系統炭素強度や資源賦存が結果のばらつきを説明し、性能基準の炭素強度規格と地域別戦略を提言する。
English
This systematic review synthesizes 28 LCA studies on hydrogen production pathways, jointly assessing environmental, economic, and technological readiness. Renewable-powered electrolysis offers lowest emissions only with additional low-carbon electricity; otherwise benefits vanish in fossil-heavy grids. Regional grid carbon intensity and resource availability drive variation. Calls for performance-based carbon intensity standards and region-specific strategies.
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
日本は水素基本戦略を掲げ、クリーン水素の供給・利用拡大を進めるが、LCAに基づく環境価値の評価は重要。本レビューは、日本の水素政策における供給源別の環境優位性を検証する際のエビデンスを提供し、国際的な基準調和や国内の認証制度設計に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
Globally, hydrogen is central to decarbonization strategies, but its climate benefits depend on production methods and grid context. This review informs ISSB-aligned disclosure and transition finance by highlighting the need for transparent LCA and performance-based standards. It supports policy efforts like the EU's delegated acts on renewable hydrogen and global carbon intensity certification.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a comprehensive synthesis of LCA evidence on hydrogen pathways, identifying methodological gaps and regional variations for future research.
🏢実務担当者:Offers guidance on selecting hydrogen production routes based on environmental performance and grid conditions, useful for corporate decarbonization planning.
🏛政策担当者:Supports the design of performance-based carbon intensity standards and region-specific hydrogen deployment strategies.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Hydrogen is not intrinsically low-carbon; its environmental value depends on how, where, and with which energy system it is produced. This PRISMA 2020 systematic review synthesizes 28 peer-reviewed life cycle assessment (LCA) studies on major hydrogen production pathways, including steam methane reforming, electrolysis, biomass-based routes, thermochemical cycles, and emerging photoelectrochemical systems. Unlike reviews focused only on carbon intensity, this study jointly evaluates environmental performance, economic feasibility, and technology readiness to identify where apparent advantages remain robust and where they disappear under real deployment conditions. The evidence shows that renewable-powered electrolysis can deliver the lowest greenhouse gas emissions when supported by additional low-carbon electricity, but the same technology can lose its climate benefit in fossil-dominated grids. Biomass and emerging routes diversify supply options but introduce water, land, material, and maturity trade-offs that are often underrepresented in policy narratives. Regional conditions, especially grid carbon intensity and resource availability, explain much of the variation observed across studies. The review also identifies persistent methodological gaps, including inconsistent system boundaries, limited dynamic grid modelling, weak treatment of indirect land use effects, and insufficient accounting for system-level benefits from flexible electrolysis. Overall, the findings support performance-based carbon intensity standards, region-specific deployment strategies, and more transparent LCA methods capable of capturing hydrogen’s role in integrated energy systems.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.3390/en19163804first seen 2026-09-04 04:59:10
🔔 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。