マレーシア半島における石炭フェーズダウンと燃料間リスク：火力維持・混焼・再エネ蓄電池導入のシステム全体トレードオフ
Coal Phase-Down and Cross-Fuel Risk in Peninsular Malaysia: System-Level Trade-Offs among Thermal Retention, Co-Firing and Renewable-Storage Deployment (原題)
Yusma N, Jaaffar AH, Abdullah B, Bajaj M
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
マレーシア半島を対象に、EnergyPLANによる通年毎時モデルで石炭フェーズダウンの4シナリオを2030/35/40年で比較した研究。石炭維持は天然ガス需要を年9.35〜12.45TWh削減するがCO₂は1.35〜1.79Mt増加し、石炭→ガスがほぼ1対1で代替されることを示す。太陽光3,200MWと蓄電池1,600MW/6.4GWhの導入は石炭・ガス双方を減らしCO₂を1.65〜3.00Mt削減、年間システムコストも3.93〜4.05億ドル低減する。石炭削減が自動的に化石燃料依存を下げるわけではなく、代替ポートフォリオ次第だと結論づける。
English
Hourly EnergyPLAN modelling of Peninsular Malaysia compares coal phase-down, thermal retention, co-firing and solar-plus-storage across 2030-2040. Retaining coal cuts gas demand by 9.35-12.45 TWh/yr but raises CO2 by 1.35-1.79 Mt/yr, with near one-for-one coal-for-gas substitution. Solar PV (3,200 MW) plus a 1,600 MW/6.4 GWh battery lowers both coal and gas use, cutting CO2 by 1.65-3.00 Mt/yr and system cost by USD 393-405 million. Coal phase-down does not automatically reduce total fossil-fuel exposure; outcomes hinge on the replacement portfolio.
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
日本でも石炭フェーズダウンとLNG依存・混焼のトレードオフはGX電源構成やトランジション政策の中心論点であり、燃料間リスクを定量化する本手法は日本の電源計画・移行金融の議論に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
Speaks directly to the global transition-finance and disclosure debate on whether coal retirement genuinely lowers fossil exposure, and to ISSB/TCFD-aligned transition-plan credibility where fuel substitution risk must be disclosed.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:燃料間代替比率や感度分析の枠組みは電力システム脱炭素モデリングの参照手法になる。
🏢実務担当者:石炭撤退や再エネ・蓄電池投資の判断で、CO₂とコストのトレードオフを定量評価する視点を提供する。
🏛政策担当者:石炭フェーズダウン政策が化石燃料依存を自動的に下げない点を、電源構成・移行計画の設計に反映すべき。
📄 Abstract（原文）
<title>Abstract</title> <p>Coal phase-down can lower power-sector emissions while shifting fuel-security exposure from coal to natural gas. This study quantifies that cross-fuel risk in Peninsular Malaysia using full-year hourly modelling in EnergyPLAN 16.22, MATLAB-based scenario automation and a controlled counterfactual that holds the wider national pathway constant while varying the treatment of an anonymised 1,600 MW Study Thermal Asset. The 2025 demand scale is externally checked against the Energy Commission’s recorded system peak, with a difference of 0.076%. Four cases are evaluated for 2030, 2035 and 2040: managed phase-down (PD), temporary retention (RET), retention with co-firing (RET-CF), and renewable-plus-storage deployment comprising 3,200 MW of solar PV and a 1,600 MW/6.4 GWh four-hour battery system (RE-ST). Relative to PD, RET reduces system natural-gas requirements by 9.35–12.45 TWh/yr but increases operational CO₂ emissions by 1.35–1.79 Mt/yr. A fuel-substitution ratio of 0.999–1.001 indicates near one-for-one coal-for-gas substitution on an input-energy basis. RET-CF preserves the gas reduction while moderating the emissions penalty. RE-ST changes the substitution mechanism more fundamentally, reducing both coal and gas use and lowering operational CO₂ emissions by 1.65–3.00 Mt/yr. It also lowers modelled annual system cost by USD 393–405 million under the adopted solar and battery cost assumptions. A 120-case sensitivity programme distinguishes the physical robustness of these effects from exposure to gas, carbon and substitute-fuel prices and retained-capacity availability. The results show that coal phase-down does not automatically reduce total fossil-fuel exposure: its resilience and decarbonisation outcomes depend on the portfolio that replaces the withdrawn coal contribution.</p>
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- Research Square https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-11393189/v1first seen 2026-11-13 04:28:18
🔔 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。