二氧化碳去除的经济学和政策综述。

Soyoung Oh, Jenna Greene, Matthias Honegger, Axel Michaelowa
{"title":"二氧化碳去除的经济学和政策综述。","authors":"Soyoung Oh, Jenna Greene, Matthias Honegger, Axel Michaelowa","doi":"10.1007/s40518-025-00252-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Despite the increasing political attention and support, the high costs of many carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies remain a barrier to their large-scale deployment. We provide an overview of the economics for two key CDR options - BECCS and DACCS - and review proposed and existing CDR policies to address the \"CDR gap\" in achieving the long-term temperature goals of the Paris Agreement.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Although we lack detailed cost breakdowns of actual projects, our review suggests that the cost range for BECCS is generally lower than that for DACCS. The key cost parameter for BECCS is the sustainability of biomass feedstock, and for DACCS the energy intensity.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Cost estimates for DACCS have increased due to experiences from commercial operation, for BECCS they are increasingly differentiated according to the sustainability of feedstock.</p>","PeriodicalId":520452,"journal":{"name":"Current sustainable/renewable energy reports","volume":"12 1","pages":"6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11905288/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review of Economics and Policies of Carbon Dioxide Removal.\",\"authors\":\"Soyoung Oh, Jenna Greene, Matthias Honegger, Axel Michaelowa\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40518-025-00252-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Despite the increasing political attention and support, the high costs of many carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies remain a barrier to their large-scale deployment. We provide an overview of the economics for two key CDR options - BECCS and DACCS - and review proposed and existing CDR policies to address the \\\"CDR gap\\\" in achieving the long-term temperature goals of the Paris Agreement.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Although we lack detailed cost breakdowns of actual projects, our review suggests that the cost range for BECCS is generally lower than that for DACCS. The key cost parameter for BECCS is the sustainability of biomass feedstock, and for DACCS the energy intensity.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Cost estimates for DACCS have increased due to experiences from commercial operation, for BECCS they are increasingly differentiated according to the sustainability of feedstock.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520452,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current sustainable/renewable energy reports\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11905288/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current sustainable/renewable energy reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40518-025-00252-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current sustainable/renewable energy reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40518-025-00252-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述目的:尽管越来越多的政治关注和支持,但许多二氧化碳去除(CDR)技术的高成本仍然是其大规模部署的障碍。我们概述了两个关键的CDR方案——BECCS和DACCS的经济学,并审查了拟议和现有的CDR政策,以解决实现《巴黎协定》长期温度目标的“CDR差距”。总结:虽然我们缺乏实际项目的详细成本细分,但我们的审查表明,BECCS的成本范围普遍低于DACCS。BECCS的关键成本参数是生物质原料的可持续性,而DACCS的关键成本参数是能源强度。最近的发现:由于商业运营的经验,DACCS的成本估算有所增加,而BECCS的成本估算则越来越多地根据原料的可持续性进行区分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Review of Economics and Policies of Carbon Dioxide Removal.

Purpose of review: Despite the increasing political attention and support, the high costs of many carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies remain a barrier to their large-scale deployment. We provide an overview of the economics for two key CDR options - BECCS and DACCS - and review proposed and existing CDR policies to address the "CDR gap" in achieving the long-term temperature goals of the Paris Agreement.

Summary: Although we lack detailed cost breakdowns of actual projects, our review suggests that the cost range for BECCS is generally lower than that for DACCS. The key cost parameter for BECCS is the sustainability of biomass feedstock, and for DACCS the energy intensity.

Recent findings: Cost estimates for DACCS have increased due to experiences from commercial operation, for BECCS they are increasingly differentiated according to the sustainability of feedstock.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Designing a Policy Mechanism for Long-Duration Energy Storage: The British Experience. Review of Economics and Policies of Carbon Dioxide Removal. Distribution Locational Marginal Pricing under Generation and Network Scarcity Conditions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1