Carbon Dioxide Removal Options for Energy Transitions: BECCS versus DACCS in Germany
エネルギー転換における二酸化炭素除去オプション：ドイツにおけるBECCS対DACCS (AI 翻訳)
Danial Esmaeili Aliabadi, Sandra Gutjahr, Mohammad Sadr, M. Jordan, D. Thrän
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
ドイツを対象に、エネルギーシステムモデルを用いてBECCSとDACCSの最適な貢献を分析した。余剰再生可能電力、残留排出量、炭素価格が高い条件下でDACCSが費用対効果の高い解決策となる可能性を示唆。結果は欧州全体にも適用可能。
English
This study integrates DACCS into a stochastic energy system model for Germany to compare it with BECCS for achieving net-zero emissions. Preliminary results show DACCS can be cost-optimal under conditions of excess renewable electricity, high residual emissions, and high carbon prices. The insights may apply to the broader European context.
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
日本のエネルギー転換においても、BECCSやDACCSのようなCDR技術の役割は重要。日本の再生可能エネルギー拡大や炭素価格政策の動向と関連し、本論文のモデルフレームワークは日本の政策立案にも示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
This paper provides a quantitative comparison of two key CDR technologies (BECCS and DACCS) in a European energy system context. For global readers, it offers insights into the conditions under which DACCS becomes viable, relevant for countries considering carbon removal portfolios.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:This paper provides a modeling framework and comparative analysis of BECCS vs DACCS in a national energy system, useful for researchers studying carbon removal integration and energy system optimization.
🏢実務担当者:Energy and utility companies can use these findings to inform investment decisions in carbon removal technologies and understand the role of DACCS under different market conditions.
🏛政策担当者:Policymakers should note the importance of excess renewable electricity and carbon pricing in making DACCS cost-optimal, and consider these factors when designing support mechanisms for carbon removal.
📄 Abstract（原文）
There is an ongoing debate about whether we should heavily invest in variable renewable energy to reduce anthropogenic emissions and utilize surplus electricity for direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), or instead prioritize bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) to provide system flexibility while simultaneously removing atmospheric emissions. Although DACCS is more costly, achieving ambitious climate targets may ultimately require such extreme mitigation options. In this study, we integrate DACCS technology into the stochastic BENOPTex model, which features various BECCS concepts and CO2 utilization pathways, to investigate the optimal contribution of carbon removal technologies for net-zero energy systems under different conditions in Germany. The risk sensitivity is formulated using the Value-at-Risk measure. The preliminary results indicate that DACCS can be part of the cost-optimal solution under specific conditions, including the availability of excess renewable electricity, high levels of residual emissions, and elevated carbon prices. While Germany is selected as the case study, the insights gained from this analysis may apply to the broader European context.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.1109/eem68581.2026.11589592first seen 2026-07-13 06:43:01
🔔 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。