Search

Different technologies produce hydrogen with varying cost and carbon footprints over the entire resource supply chain and manufacturing steps. This paper examines the relative costs of carbon mitigation from a life cycle perspective for 12 different hydrogen production techniques using fossil fuels, nuclear energy and renewable sources by technology substitution. Production costs and life cycle emissions are parameterized and re-estimated from currently available assessments to produce robust ranges to describe uncertainties for each technology. Hydrogen production routes are then compared using a combination of metrics, levelized cost of carbon mitigation and the proportional decarbonization benchmarked against steam methane reforming, to provide a clearer picture of the relative merits of various hydrogen production pathways, the limitations of technologies and the research challenges that need to be addressed for cost-effective decarbonization pathways. The results show that there is a trade-off between the cost of mitigation and the proportion of decarbonization achieved. The most cost-effective methods of decarbonization still utilize fossil feedstocks due to their low cost of extraction and processing, but only offer moderate decarbonisation levels due to previous underestimations of supply chain emissions contributions. Methane pyrolysis may be the most cost-effective short-term abatement solution, but its emissions reduction performance is heavily dependent on managing supply chain emissions whilst cost effectiveness is governed by the price of solid carbon. Renewable electrolytic routes offer significantly higher emissions reductions, but production routes are more complex than those that utilise naturally-occurring energy-dense fuels and hydrogen costs are high at modest renewable energy capacity factors. Nuclear routes are highly cost-effective mitigation options, but could suffer from regionally varied perceptions of safety and concerns regarding proliferation and the available data lacks depth and transparency. Better-performing fossil-based hydrogen production technologies with lower decarbonization fractions will be required to minimise the total cost of decarbonization but may not be commensurate with ambitious climate targets.

Purpose Dairy products are rich in nutrients that positively influence bone health and hence fracture risk, and have therefore been recommended and used for fracture prevention. To help decision makers to efficiently allocate scare resources, it is further important to assess the public health and economic impact of any health intervention. In recent years, several studies have been conducted to estimate the public health and/or economic impact of dairy products but no overview is currently available. This article aims therefore to summarize evidence and review articles that estimated the public health and/or economic impact of vitamin D-fortified dairy products for fracture prevention. Methods A literature review was conducted using PubMed to identify original studies that assessed the public health and/or economic impact of dairy products (or of calcium/vitamin D supplementation) for fracture prevention up to January 15, 2017. Results Seven articles were identified. Different strategies were used by the authors to model the economic/public health impact of dairy products. The four studies assessing the public health impact of dairy products revealed a substantial benefit in terms of fracture prevented, life years, disability-adjusted life years and/or quality-adjusted life years gained. Studies assessing the cost-effectiveness revealed that the use of dairy products is generally cost-effective in the general population aged above 70 years, and from the age of 60 years in populations at high risk of fractures. Conclusion This systematic review suggests that the use of dairy products could substantially reduce the burden of osteoporotic fractures and seem to be an economically beneficial strategy.

A Summary Titrated supplementations with vitamin D-fortified yogurt, based on spontaneous calcium and vitamin D intakes, can be cost-effective in postmenopausal women with or without increased risk of osteoporotic fractures.Introduction The objective of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of the vitamin D-fortified yogurt given to women with and without an increased risk of osteoporotic fracture.Methods A validated cost-effectiveness microsimulation Markov model of osteoporosis management was used. Three personalized supplementation scenarios to reflect the Ca/Vit D needs taking into account the well-known variations in dietary habits and a possible pharmacological supplementation in Ca/Vit D, given above or in combination with anti-osteoporosis medications: one yogurt per day, i.e., 400 mg of Ca + 200 IU of Vit D (scenario 1 U), two yogurts per day, i.e., 800 mg of Ca + 400 IU of Vit D (scenario 2 U), or three yogurts per day, i.e., 1,200 mg of Ca + 600 IU of Vit D (scenario 3 U). Results One yogurt is cost-effective in the general population above the age of 70 years and in all age groups in women with low bone mineral density (BMD) or prevalent vertebral fracture (PVF). The daily intake of two yogurts is cost-effective above 80 years in the general population and above 70 years in the two groups of women at increased risk of fractures. However, an intake of three yogurts per day is only cost-effective above 80 years old in the general population, as well as in women with low BMD or PVF.Conclusions Our study is the first economic analysis supporting the cost-effectiveness of dairy products, fortified with vitamin D, in the armamentarium against osteoporotic fractures.