Large-ScaleCarbon Removal Will Create Public Health,Economic, and Climate Trade-Offs
大規模な炭素除去は公衆衛生、経済、気候のトレードオフを生み出す (AI 翻訳)
Parisa Javadi, Patrick O’Rourke, Jay Fuhrman, Daniel H. Loughlin, Scott C. Doney, William Shobe, João Ferreira, Andrés F. Clarens
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
米国を対象に、6つのCDRポートフォリオの空気質・健康影響を統合モデルで定量比較。高CDR経路では気候被害回避約2.5~5.8兆ドル、健康便益2.8~6.5兆ドル、低CDR経路では気候被害回避同等、健康便益3.5~8兆ドルだが、短期的な化石燃料削減コストが大きい。CDR技術への過度の依存は5~6兆ドルの収入を生む一方、大気質改善の機会損失も示唆。
English
This study quantifies air quality and public health trade-offs of six CDR portfolios for the U.S. using a coupled modeling approach. High-CDR avoids $2.5–5.8 trillion in climate damages and yields $2.8–6.5 trillion in health benefits, while low-CDR yields higher health benefits ($3.5–8 trillion) but costs more due to deeper fossil fuel cuts. Heavy CDR reliance could generate $5–6 trillion in revenues but forgoes some air quality benefits.
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
本論文は、CDRの大規模導入がもたらす公衆衛生・経済・気候のトレードオフを米国を例に定量評価した。日本のGX政策においても、CDRの位置づけや大気質改善効果を考慮した統合的な議論が必要であり、本結果は政策設計の参考となる。
In the global GX context
This paper provides a systematic, quantitative analysis of the trade-offs between climate benefits, public health, and economic costs of CDR, which is critical for global climate policy discussions including ISSB and transition finance frameworks. It highlights the importance of balancing CDR with direct emission reductions.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a comprehensive framework for assessing CDR portfolios' multi-dimensional impacts, including health co-benefits.
🏢実務担当者:CDR companies and investors can use the revenue projections and health cost insights for business planning.
🏛政策担当者:Informs the design of CDR deployment targets and the need to integrate air quality and health considerations into climate policy.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Economy-wide efforts to achieve net-zero emissions offer climate and air quality-related public health benefits from reducing fossil fuel combustion. However, carbon dioxide removal (CDR) may be necessary to meet emissions targets cost-effectively, and relying on CDR would forego some air-quality benefits. Here, we systematically quantify the regional air quality and public health implications of six CDR portfolios for the U.S. using a coupled modeling approach and compare those to a no U.S. climate action scenario. While both high- and low-CDR deployment avoid about $2.5–5.8 trillion USD2020 (or 0.4–0.8% of cumulative GDP (CGDP)) in climate damages, the high-CDR pathway costs $11–13 trillion USD2020 (or 1.8–1.9% of CGDP) by 2050, whereas the low-CDR pathway costs $16–20 trillion USD2020 (or 2.6–2.9% of CGDP) due to deeper near-term fossil fuel reductions. Public health benefits reach $2.8–6.5 trillion USD2020 (or 0.5–0.9% of CGDP) under high-CDR and are $3.5–8 trillion USD2020 (0.6–1.2% of CGDP) under low-CDR, reflecting greater reductions in particulate matter and ozone exposure and preventing approximately 12,600 additional premature deaths by mid-century. However, heavy reliance on CDR technologies could generate $5–6 trillion USD2020 (∼0.8–0.9% of CGDP) in CDR revenues by 2050, exemplifying the trade-offs between public health, economy, and climate.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Large-Scale_Carbon_Removal_Will_Create_Public_Health_Economic_and_Climate_Trade-Offs/32602704first seen 2026-07-03 04:39:13
🔔 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。