Carbon‐Free Energy Carriers and Circular Feedstocks: Bridging CO 2 Valorization with Hydrogen and Ammonia Economies
炭素フリーエネルギーキャリアと循環型原料：CO2価値化と水素・アンモニア経済の橋渡し (AI 翻訳)
Amjad Ali, Tahir Rasheed, Jamile Mohammadi Moradian, Khurram Shehzad, W. A. Qureshi, Santosh Kumar, M. Hussain, Shu Zhang
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、炭素フリーエネルギーキャリアと循環型炭素原料を4つのクラスに分類する枠組みを提案。水素・アンモニアキャリアを熱力学・経済性・ライフサイクルで評価し、アンモニアが水素キャリアとして有望である一方、NOx生成や燃料電池耐久性に課題があることを指摘。カーボンニュートラルな酸素化物（e-メタノールなど）が移行的役割を果たすと結論づける。
English
This paper proposes a four-class framework for carbon-free energy carriers and circular feedstocks. It benchmarks H2 and NH3 carriers against electrification and carbon-based pathways using thermodynamic, techno-economic, and lifecycle metrics. Ammonia emerges as a key hydrogen vector but faces NOx and durability issues. Carbon-neutral oxygenates (e-methanol, DME) are transitional.
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
日本でも水素・アンモニアサプライチェーンが国家戦略として推進されており、本論文の分類枠組みは技術評価や政策優先順位付けに有用。特にアンモニアの課題（NOx、効率）は日本の石炭混焼計画にも示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
The framework addresses the terminological confusion in the field and provides a consistent basis for comparing energy carriers. It is relevant for global net-zero strategies, especially for hard-to-abate sectors like shipping and aviation, and for hydrogen/ammonia trade.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a clear classification and benchmarking methodology for evaluating hydrogen and ammonia carriers against alternatives.
🏢実務担当者:Useful for companies assessing investment in hydrogen/ammonia infrastructure or carbon capture utilization.
🏛政策担当者:Helps prioritize scalable decarbonization pathways and understand trade-offs between carriers.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Direct electrification cannot reach shipping, aviation, high‐temperature industry, or long‐duration storage due to physical, not economic, constraints. Consequently, molecular energy carriers and circular carbon feedstocks are central to deep decarbonization strategies. The field, however, suffers from inconsistent terminology, often conflating carbon‐free, carbon‐neutral, and carbon‐circulating systems. We address this through a strict four‐class framework. Class I comprises carbon‐free energy carriers (H 2 , NH 3 , H 2 O 2 , NaBH 4 , NH 3 BH 3 , N 2 H 4 ·H 2 O). Class II includes carbon‐neutral vectors—carbon‐containing molecules derived from biogenic, atmospheric, or captured CO 2 under net‐zero life‐cycle conditions (CH 3 OH, HCOOH, DME, OME 0 – 5 ). Class III covers circular carbon feedstocks, including biomass, waste streams, and captured CO 2 as carbon inputs. Class IV is operational, describing end‐use applications of any vector. Within this framework, H 2 ‐ and NH 3 ‐based carriers are benchmarked against electrification and carbon‐based pathways using thermodynamic, techno‐economic, and life‐cycle metrics. Ammonia emerges as a key hydrogen vector due to large‐scale production, though deployment is limited by NO x formation, cracking losses, and fuel‐cell durability. Hybrid vectors (H 2 /NH 3 , H 2 /NH 3 /H 2 O 2 blends) and carbon‐neutral oxygenates (e‐methanol, DME, OME) are transitional. TRL, MRL, and SIRL further differentiate unit feasibility from system deployability, enabling consistent comparison of carriers, clarifying efficiency, infrastructure, and life‐cycle trade‐offs, and supporting prioritization of scalable decarbonization pathways.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.1002/adsu.70544first seen 2026-06-27 05:19:27
🔔 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。