Beyond Decarbonization: Quantifying Circularity in Energy System Planning
脱炭素化を超えて：エネルギーシステム計画における循環性の定量化 (AI 翻訳)
Javiera Vergara-Zambrano, Styliani Avraamidou
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、エネルギーシステム計画に循環経済（CE）指標を導入するための枠組みを提案。リチウムイオン電池や太陽光・風力などの特性を考慮し、MICRONフレームワークを拡張。ウィスコンシン大学マディソン校の事例分析により、風力中心のポートフォリオが高い循環性スコアを示す一方、系統脱炭素化と循環性の間にはトレードオフが存在することを明らかにした。
English
This paper proposes a metric for quantifying circularity in energy system planning, adapting the MICRON framework to account for specific energy technology characteristics like lithium-ion batteries, solar, and wind. A case study at the University of Wisconsin-Madison shows wind-only portfolios achieve higher circularity scores, while decarbonization strategies that increase reliance on energy storage may reduce circularity due to material demands. Sensitivity analysis highlights end-of-life recovery as a key factor.
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
日本では再生可能エネルギーの導入拡大に伴い、資源制約や廃棄物問題が顕在化しつつある。本論文の循環性指標は、日本のエネルギーシステム計画においても、コストやGHG排出だけでなく資源効率を評価する枠組みとして参考になる。特に、蓄電池の大量導入が循環性に与える影響の定量化は、日本国内の政策検討に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
Globally, as renewable energy deployment accelerates, material scarcity and waste management become critical. This work provides a systematic way to integrate circularity into energy planning, complementing existing metrics focused on cost and emissions. The findings on trade-offs between decarbonization and circularity are relevant for energy modelers and policymakers worldwide.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Offers a novel metric for quantifying circularity in energy system planning, bridging circular economy and energy modeling.
🏢実務担当者:Can be used by energy planners to assess material efficiency and circularity alongside traditional cost and emission metrics.
🏛政策担当者:Highlights the need to incorporate circularity criteria into renewable energy deployment strategies and infrastructure planning.
📄 Abstract（原文）
While the transition from traditional energy sources to renewable energy is necessary to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, it introduces new challenges related to material use, both in quantity and type, potentially leading to resource scarcity, biodiversity loss, and waste accumulation. Therefore, incorporating circular economy (CE) principles into the design and planning of energy systems becomes essential. Despite the growing recognition of circularity, current assessments in energy systems focus on economic performance and GHG emissions. In this work, we propose a metric for quantifying circularity of energy systems based on the CE assessment framework MICRON, addressing the gap between CE metrics and energy systems planning. The framework is adapted to energy systems by accounting for the specific characteristics of energy technologies and by incorporating metrics associated with critical material use, scarcity, and durability. Its applicability is demonstrated through a case study of energy system planning at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, considering a grid-connected system with solar, wind, and lithium-ion battery technologies. Results show that wind-only portfolios achieve higher overall circularity scores than solar-only and hybrid systems, reflecting the higher efficiency and availability of wind energy. Hybrid systems exhibit higher durability and more efficient material use by avoiding system oversizing. Regarding decarbonization strategies, reducing grid reliance and associated emissions does not necessarily improve circularity, as energy storage is required to ensure reliability. Storage systems increase material demand, the share of critical materials, and replacement frequency. Finally, a sensitivity analysis was performed, highlighting that end-of-life recovery is a key factor influencing circularity.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- crossref https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.177165first seen 2026-06-20 06:42:18 · last seen 2026-06-21 05:31:49
🔔 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。