← 論文一覧に戻る

クラウドネイティブ・インフラエンジニアリングにおけるエンボディドカーボンの第一級制約化:持続可能なクラウド運用のためのライフサイクル考慮型フレームワーク

EMBODIED CARBON AS A FIRST-CLASS CONSTRAINT IN CLOUD-NATIVE INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING: A LIFECYCLE-AWARE FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE CLOUD OPERATIONS (原題)

Dr. Neha Sharma

Educational Administration Theory and Practice journal📚 査読済 / ジャーナル2026-09-29#炭素会計経営インパクト: コスト削減対象セクター: cross_sector
原典: https://kuey.net/index.php/kuey/article/view/12266
📄 PDF

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

クラウドの環境負荷議論が運用時炭素に偏る中、ハードウェア製造・輸送・廃棄に伴うエンボディドカーボンを設計上の第一級制約として扱う枠組みを提案する。炭素減価モデル、IaC解析、異種計算スケジューリング、CI/CD統合の4要素を組み合わせる。サーバー寿命を3年から5年に延ばすことで純排出を28〜57%削減し得ると示す。

English

This paper reframes cloud sustainability around embodied carbon—emissions from manufacturing, transport, and disposal of hardware—arguing it is becoming the dominant, intractable share of cloud footprints as PUE and renewables improve. It proposes a lifecycle-aware framework combining a carbon depreciation model, carbon-aware IaC analysis, heterogeneous compute scheduling, and CI/CD carbon thresholds. Extending server lifetimes from three to five years can cut net cloud emissions by 28–57%.

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

クラウド利用企業のScope 3(資本財・上流)算定や、データセンターのライフサイクル開示を求めるSSBJ・有報対応に直結する論点。ハードウェア更新サイクルの見直しは調達・IT投資判断にも影響する。

In the global GX context

Speaks directly to Scope 3 Category 2 (capital goods) accounting and to ISSB/CSRD expectations around lifecycle and upstream emissions in the ICT sector. It pushes disclosure infrastructure toward treating embodied carbon as a design and procurement variable rather than an afterthought.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:エンボディドカーボンを性能・コストと並ぶ設計制約として定式化する枠組みは、ICT部門のScope 3算定研究の出発点になる。

🏢実務担当者:サーバー更新サイクルやハードウェア再利用を炭素・コスト両面で評価する際の実務的な判断材料を提供する。

🏛政策担当者:データセンターのライフサイクル排出開示や調達基準を設計する際、運用時炭素だけでなくエンボディドカーボンを含める根拠になる。

📄 Abstract(原文)

The discourse on cloud sustainability has been dominated by operational carbon—the emissions associated with electricity consumption during workload execution. This focus, while important, obscures a critical and growing dimension of cloud environmental impact: embodied carbon, the emissions released during the manufacturing, transportation, and disposal of the physical infrastructure that underpins cloud services. As renewable energy adoption accelerates and data center power usage effectiveness (PUE) approaches theoretical limits, embodied carbon is emerging as the dominant and most intractable component of cloud carbon footprints. This paper presents a lifecycle-aware framework for cloud-native infrastructure engineering that treats embodied carbon as a first-class constraint alongside performance, cost, and reliability. The proposed framework integrates: (1) a carbon depreciation model that incentivizes extended hardware lifetimes by allocating embodied carbon costs to newly provisioned servers; (2) a carbon-aware infrastructure-as-code (IaC) analysis engine that estimates embodied carbon impacts during the design phase; (3) a heterogeneous compute scheduling layer that matches workload characteristics to hardware generations with different embodied carbon profiles; and (4) a carbon-aware CI/CD integration that incorporates embodied carbon thresholds into deployment decisions. Drawing on empirical evidence from hyperscale deployments and lifecycle assessment studies, the framework demonstrates that extending server lifetimes from three to five years can reduce net cloud emissions by 28–57%, while GreenSKU-style hardware reuse strategies can achieve 8% net emissions reductions in production environments. The paper establishes that embodied carbon must be treated not as an externality but as a fundamental architectural constraint, and that doing so requires rethinking foundational assumptions about hardware refresh cycles, performance homogeneity, and the very meaning of “efficiency” in cloud operations.

🔗 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。