請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21334
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 闕蓓德 | |
dc.contributor.author | Ya-Wen Sung | en |
dc.contributor.author | 宋雅文 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T03:31:21Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2019-08-19 | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2019-08-12 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Abín, R., Laca, A., Laca, A. and Díaz, M. (2018) Environmental assessment of intensive egg production: A Spanish case study. Journal of Cleaner Production 179, 160-168.
Á. de Miguel, A.Y. Hoekstra, E. García-Calvo (2015) Sustainability of the water footprint of the Spanish pork industry. Ecological Indicators 57, 465-474. Ali, T., Huang, J., Wang, J. and Xie, W. (2017) Global footprints of water and land resources through China's food trade. Global Food Security 12, 139-145. Allan, J.A. (1993) “Fortunately There are Substitutes for Water, Otherwise our Hydro-Political Futures Would be Impossible.” In Priorities for Water Resources Allocation and Management, 13–26. Bai, X., Ren, X., Khanna, N.Z., Zhang, G., Zhou, N., Bai, Y. and Hu, M. (2018) A comparative study of a full value-chain water footprint assessment using two international standards at a large-scale hog farm in China. Journal of Cleaner Production 176, 557-565. Baumgartner, D.U., De Baan, L. and Nemecek, T. (2008) European grain legumes – environment-friendly animal feed? Life cycle assessment of pork, chicken meat, egg and milk production. Federal Department of Economic Affairs DEA, Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART, Zürich, Zwitzerland, 106. Berger, M., van der Ent, R., Eisner, S., Bach, V. and Finkbeiner, M. (2014) Water accounting and vulnerability evaluation (WAVE): considering atmospheric evaporation recycling and the risk of freshwater depletion in water footprinting. Environmental science & technology 48, 4521-4528. Boulay, A. M., Bulle, C., Bayart, J. B., Deschênes, L. and Margni, M. (2011) Regional characterization of freshwater use in LCA: modeling direct impacts on human health. Environmental science & technology 45, 8948-8957. Boulay, A. M., Bare, J., Benini, L., Berger, M., Lathuillière, M.J., Manzardo, A., Margni, M., Motoshita, M., Núñez, M., Pastor, A.V., Ridoutt, B., Oki, T., Worbe, S. and Pfister, S. (2018) The WULCA consensus characterization model for water scarcity footprints: assessing impacts of water consumption based on available water remaining (AWARE). The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 23, 368-378. Cesari, V., Zucali, M., Sandrucci, A., Tamburini, A., Bava, L. and Toschi, I. (2017) Environmental impact assessment of an Italian vertically integrated broiler system through a Life Cycle approach. Journal of Cleaner Production 143, 904-911. FAO (2011a) Energy-Smart Food for People and Climate. Rome, FAO. FAO (2019) FAOSTAT, Rome. Available: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/?#data/ FAO (2019) FishStatJ, Rome. Available: http://www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/software/fishstatj/en FAO (2015) Food Wastage Footprint & Climate Change. Rome, FAO. FAO (2013) Food Wastage Footprint: Impacts on Natural Resources. Rome, FAO. FAO (2011b) Global food losses and food waste – Extent, causes and prevention. Rome, FAO. FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WEP and WHO (2018) The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2018. Building climate resilience for food security and nutrition. Rome, FAO. Ghasempour, A. and Ahmadi, E. (2016) Assessment of environment impacts of egg production chain using life cycle. Journal of Environmental Management 183, 980-987. Gilmont, M. (2015) Water resource decoupling in the MENA through food trade as a mechanism for circumventing national water scarcity. Food Security 7, 1113-1131. Gleick, P.H. et al. (2014) The World’s Water Volume 8: The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources. González-García, S., Gomez-Fernández, Z., Dias, A.C., Feijoo, G., Moreira, M.T. and Arroja, L. (2014) Life Cycle Assessment of broiler chicken production: a Portuguese case study. Journal of Cleaner Production 74, 125-134. Hallström, E., Carlsson-Kanyama, A. and Börjesson, P. (2015) Environmental impact of dietary change: a systematic review. Hoekstra, A.Y., Mekonnen, M.M., Chapagain, A.K., Mathews, R.E. and Richter, B.D. (2012) Global monthly water scarcity: blue water footprints versus blue water availability. PLoS One 7(2), e32688. Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London. Ibidhi, R., Hoekstra, A.Y., Gerbens-Leenes, P.W. and Chouchane, H. Water, land and carbon footprints of sheep and chicken meat produced in Tunisia under different farming systems. Ecological Indicators 77, 304-313. International Energy Agency (2012) CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion. International Energy Agency (2019) Global Energy & CO2 Status Report. Available: https://www.iea.org/geco/ International Energy Agency (2018) Key World Energy Statistics. Available: https://webstore.iea.org/key-world-energy-statistics-2018 ISO (2014) 14046: Environmental Management-Water Footprint-Principles, Requirements and Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland. Jeswani, H.K., Burkinshaw, R. and Azapagic, A. (2015) Environmental sustainability issues in the food–energy–water nexus: Breakfast cereals and snacks. Sustainable Production and Consumption 2, 17-28. Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., Payet, J., Rebitzer, G. and Rosenbaum, R. (2003) IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 8(6), 324-330. Kalhor, T., Rajabipour, A., Akram, A. and Sharifi, M. (2016) Environmental impact assessment of chicken meat production using life cycle assessment. Information Processing in Agriculture 3, 262-271. Karan, E., Asadi, S., Mohtar, R. and Baawain, M. (2018) Towards the optimization of sustainable food-energy-water systems: A stochastic approach. Journal of Cleaner Production 171, 662-674. Kibler, K.M., Reinhart, D., Hawkins, C., Motlagh, A.M. and Wright, J. (2018) Food waste and the food-energy-water nexus: A review of food waste management alternatives. Waste Management 74, 52-62. Koivunen, E., Tuunainen, P., Valkonen, E. and Valaja, J. (2015) Use of semi-leafless peas (Pisum sativum L) in laying hen diets. Agricultural and Food Science 24, 84-91. Lamnatou, C., Ezcurra-Ciaurriz, X., Chemisana, D. and Plà-Aragonés, L.M. (2016) Environmental assessment of a pork-production system in North-East of Spain focusing on life-cycle swine nutrition. Journal of Cleaner Production 137, 105-115. Lee, Y.-J. (2015). Land, carbon and water footprints in Taiwan. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 54, 1-8. Leinonen, I., Williams, A.G., Wiseman, J., Guy, J. and Kyriazakis, I. (2012) Predicting the environmental impacts of chicken systems in the United Kingdom through a life cycle assessment: egg production systems. Poultry Science 91, 26-40. Li, Y.Q., Tang, J.W., Che, S.G., Wen, Y.C., Sun, W.Y. and Zhao, B.Q. (2015) Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizer on the emission of CO2 and N2O from the summer maize Field in the North China plain. Scientia Agricultura Sinica 48, 4381-4389. Lin, L., Xu, F., Ge, X. and Li, Y. (2018) Improving the sustainability of organic waste management practices in the food-energy-water nexus: A comparative review of anaerobic digestion and composting. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 89, 151-167. Luo, Y., Long, X., Wu, C. and Zhang, J. (2017) Decoupling CO2 emissions from economic growth in agricultural sector across 30 Chinese provinces from 1997 to 2014. Journal of Cleaner Production 159, 220-228. Max Roser and Hannah Ritchie (2019) Energy Production & Changing Energy Sources. OurWorldInData.org. Available: https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-and-changing-energy-sources Max Roser and Hannah Ritchie (2019) Hunger and Undernourishment. OurWorldInData.org. Available: https://ourworldindata.org/hunger-and-undernourishment Max Roser and Hannah Ritchie (2019) Water Use and Sanitation. OurWorldInData.org. Available: https://ourworldindata.org/water-use-sanitation Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2016) Four billion people facing severe water scarcity. Science Advances 2(2), e1500323. Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products, Value of Water Research Report Series No. 47, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands. Mekonnen, M.M., Hoekstra, A.Y. (2014). Water footprint benchmarks for crop production: A first global assessment. Ecological indicators, 46, 214-223. MungKung, R., Pengthamkeerati, P., Chaichana, R., Watcharothai, S., Kitpakornsanti, K. and Tapananont, S. (2019) Life Cycle Assessment of Thai organic Hom Mali rice to evaluate the climate change, water use and biodiversity impacts. Journal of Cleaner Production 211, 687-694. Noya, I., Villanueva-Rey, P., González-García, S., Fernandez, M.D., Rodriguez, M.R. and Moreira, M.T. (2017) Life Cycle Assessment of pig production: A case study in Galicia. Journal of Cleaner Production 142, 4327-4338. OECD (2001) Environmental indicators to measure decoupling of environmental pressure from economic growth. ENV/EPOC (2001) 26. Paris: OECD. OECD (2002) Indicators to measure decoupling of environmental pressures from economic growth. SG/SD (2002) 1 . Paris: OECD Pelletier, N. (2018) Changes in the life cycle environmental footprint of egg production in Canada from 1962 to 2012. Journal of Cleaner Production 176, 1144-1153. Pelletier, N. (2017) Life cycle assessment of Canadian egg products, with differentiation by hen housing system type. Journal of Cleaner Production 152, 167-180. Pfister, S., Koehler, A. and Hellweg, S. (2009) Assessing the environmental impacts of freshwater consumption in LCA. Environmental science & technology 43, 4098-4104. Rathnayake, M., Chaireongsirikul, T., Svangariyaskul, A., Lawtrakul, L. and Toochinda P. (2018) Process simulation based life cycle assessment for bioethanol production from cassava, cane molasses, and rice straw. Journal of Cleaner Production 190, 24-35. Ren, D., Yang, Y., Yang, Y., Richards, K. and Zhou, X. (2018) Land-Water-Food Nexus and indications of crop adjustment for water shortage solution. Science of The Total Environment 626, 11-21. Rost, S., Gerten, D., Bondeau, A., Lucht, W., Rohwer, J., Schaphoff, S. (2008). Agricultural green and blue water consumption and its influence on the global water system. Water Resources Research, 44(9). Salmoral, G. and Yan, X. (2018) Food-energy-water nexus: A life cycle analysis on virtual water and embodied energy in food consumption in the Tamar catchment, UK. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 133, 320-330. Schmidt, J.H. (2015) Life cycle assessment of five vegetable oils. Journal of Cleaner Production 87, 130-138. Siebert, S., Döll, P. (2010). Quantifying blue and green virtual water contents in global crop production as well as potential production losses without irrigation. Journal of Hydrology, 384(3), 198-217. Skunca, D., Tomasevic, I., Nastasijevic, I., Tomovic, V. and Djekic, I. (2018) Life cycle assessment of the chicken meat chain. Journal of Cleaner Production 184, 440-450. Sultana, M.N., Uddin, M.M., Ridoutt, B., Hemme, T. and Peters, K. (2015) Benchmarking consumptive water use of bovine milk production systems for 60 geographical regions: An implication for Global Food Security. Global Food Security 4, 56-68. Takawira, G. (2017). Review of Methodologies of Water Footprint. International Journal of Advanced Research, 5(5), 1-5. Taniguchi, M., Masuhara, N. and Burnett, K. (2017) Water, energy, and food security in the Asia Pacific region. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 11, 9-19. The World Bank (2019) Population, total. Available: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?view=chart The World Bank (2019) Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (% of GDP). Available: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.AGR.TOTL.ZS The World Bank (2016) Who Are the Poor in the Developing World? Policy Research Working Paper 7844. The World Bank (2014) World Development Indicators Washington, DC. Available: http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators. Tilman, D. and Clark, M. (2014) Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature 515, 518-522. Tom, M.S., Fischbeck, P.S. and Hendrickson, C.T. (2016) Energy use, blue water footprint, and greenhouse gas emissions for current food consumption patterns and dietary recommendations in the US. Environmental Systems and Decisions 36, 92-103. UNEP (2011) Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth, A Report of the Working Group on Decoupling to the International Resource Panel. Fischer-Kowalski, M., Swilling, M., von Weizsacker, E.U., Ren, Y., Moriguchi, Y., Crane, W., Krausmann, F., Eisenmenger, N., Giljum, S., Hennicke, P., Romero Lankao, P., Siriban Manalang, A., Sewerin, S. United Nations (2014) The road to dignity by 2030: ending poverty, transforming all lives and protecting the planet: synthesis report of the Secretary-General on the post-2015 sustainable development agenda. Wang, Q., Zhao, M. and Li, R. (2019) Decoupling sectoral economic output from carbon emissions on city level: A comparative study of Beijing and Shanghai, China. Journal of Cleaner Production 209, 126-133. Wang, X., Dadouma, A., Chen, Y., Sui, P., Gao, W. and Jia, L. (2015) Sustainability evaluation of the large-scale pig farming system in North China: an emergy analysis based on life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 102, 144-164. Weidema, B.P., Bauer, C., Hischier, R., Mutel, C., Nemecek, T., Reinhard, J., Vadenbo, C.O., Wernet, G. (2013) Overview and methodology. Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3. Ecoinvent Report 1(v3). St. Gallen: The ecoinvent Centre. Wiedemann, S.G., McGahan, E.J. and Murphy, C.M. (2017) Resource use and environmental impacts from Australian chicken meat production. Journal of Cleaner Production 140, 675-684. Yuan, Q., Song, G., Fullana-i-palmer, P., Wang, Y., Semakula, H.M., Mekonnen, M.M. and Zhang S. (2017) Water footprint of feed required by farmed fish in China based on a Monte Carlo-supported von Bertalanffy growth model: A policy implication. Journal of Cleaner Production 153, 41-50. 內政部戶政司 (2019),人口統計資料:https://www.ris.gov.tw/app/portal/346。 台灣電力公司 (2019),歷年發購電量及結構:https://www.taipower.com.tw/tc/Chart.aspx?mid=194。 台灣糖業公司 (2009-2018),「股東常會台糖年報」。 行政院主計總處 (2018),「國內各業生產毛額平減指數 (1981年~)」 行政院農業委員會 (2018b),「農業統計年報」。 行政院農業委員會 (2018a),「糧食供需年報」。 行政院農業委員會農糧署 (2010-2018),「臺閩地區農產品生產量值」。 行政院環境保護署 (2018),「2018年中華民國國家溫室氣體排放清冊報告」。 周嫦娥、李繼宇、林惠芬、阮香蘭(民100)。企業水資源管理新指標-水足跡,工業污染防治。 經濟部水利署 (2019),「第四篇 台灣地區民國106年農業用水量統計報告」。 經濟部統計處 (2019),「工業產銷存 – 產品統計」https://www.moea.gov.tw/MNS/dos/content/SubMenu.aspx?menu_id=21041。 經濟部能源局 (2019),「能源統計年報」。 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21334 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 隨著經濟發展、人口不斷上升,使得大量能資源面臨稀缺之問題,而糧食之需求逐年提高,然而,糧食生產亦需消耗大量能資源。根據聯合國糧食及農業組織統計,全球糧食生產所需之能源為全球使用量之30%、淡水資源為全球使用量之70%,而糧食、能源與水係為人類生存之必須,因此,近年大量研究探討此三者間之鏈結關係,其涵蓋範圍廣泛,目前多數研究旨在建立評估架構與模式,以糧食為主之研究則著重於評估及量化單一產品供應鏈中FEW之鏈結關係,而較少探討符合人類需求之多樣化糧食,且在探討FEW之鏈結關係時,主要聚焦在環境方面之議題,而忽略經濟層面之考量,使其於反映人類所需之糧食,並同時考慮環境及經濟面向評估之決策輔助有限。
本研究評估符合臺灣熱量需求75.17%及供給量57.30%之13種糧食供應鏈,以生命週期評估及ISO 14046稀缺性水足跡評估量化其於環境、能源與水之潛在衝擊及FEW之鏈結,並結合脫鉤指標分析,探討環境影響、資源使用與經濟效益之關係,此評估架構同時考量人類糧食需求、環境與能資源衝擊及經濟效益。 結果顯示,於單位生產量下,環境衝擊最大者為雞蛋 (2.5 mPt)、雞肉 (2.25 mPt) 及豬肉 (1.9 mPt),資源衝擊最大者為雞蛋 (0.16 mPt)、雞肉 (0.15 mPt) 及黃豆 (0.13 mPt),碳足跡最大者為雞肉 (6.47 kg CO2 eq)、大豆油 (6.43 kg CO2 eq) 及雞蛋 (5.58 kg CO2 eq),稀缺性水足跡最大者為雞肉 (28.45 m3)、大豆油 (20.17 m3) 及魚類 (18.54 m3);而脫鉤指標分析結果顯示,2010年至2015年臺灣之糧食生產皆有相對脫鉤,而2009年及2016年則無脫鉤現象,環境影響熱點為豬肉、雞肉及雞蛋之生產,淡水資源使用熱點為雞肉、魚類、豬肉及白米。透過本研究之評估分析結果,得以顯現糧食生產之FEW鏈結關係及其與經濟效益間之關係,並得知各衝擊之熱點,進而輔助糧食永續生產決策之制定。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | With booming economy and rising population, many resources are facing the problem of scarcity, and the demand of food increase year by year. Yet food production also consumes a lot of energy and has many impacts on human health, climate change, ecosystem quality and resources. According to Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), global food production cost 30% of energy consumption and 70% of freshwater usage in the world. Because food, energy and water are essential for human, many researches about the nexus of these three things were wildly conducted in the recent years. However, most of the researches are mainly about building the evaluation of structure and pattern. And the researches based on food production are mostly focus on the evaluation and quantification of the FEW nexus of a single product supply chain. Only few researches discussed the diversification of food which suit the human requirement. Furthermore, the discussions of the FEW nexus are mainly focus on environment issues and neglect the influence of economy. As a result, these researches will only have limit assist for the decision making.
The evaluation of this study meets the calorie demand (75.17%) and supply (57.30%) of the 13 food production supply chains in Taiwan. By using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and ISO 14046 Water Scaarcity Footprint evaluation, this study is able to quantify the potential impact to the environment, energy and water, and the relationship of FEW. Also, this study combines the Decoupling Indicator to discuss the relationship between the environment influence, resource usage and economic benefit. The results showed that the main contribution of environmental impact (per functional unit) are eggs (2.5 mPt), chicken (2.25 mPt) and pork (1.9 mPt). The main contribution of resources impact are eggs (0.16 mPt), chicken (0.15 mPt) and soybean (0.13 mPt). The main contribution of carbon footprint are chicken (6.47 kg CO2 eq), soybean oil (6.43 kg CO2 eq) and eggs (5.58 kg CO2 eq). The main contribution of water scarcity are chicken (28.45 m3), soybean oil (20.17 m3) and fish (18.54 m3). And the results of Decoupling Indicator analysis show that the food production of Taiwan from 2010 to 2015 are all relatively decoupling. In contrast, the food production of Taiwan in 2008, 2009 and 2016 is coupling. The hotspots of environmental impact are the production of pork, chicken and eggs. The hotspots of freshwater usage are chicken, fish, pork and rice. In conclusion, the analysis of this study shows the FEW nexus of food production, the relationship between FEW and economic benefit, and the hotspots of each impacts. These results will further help the decision making of sustainable food production. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T03:31:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-R06541216-1.pdf: 5485291 bytes, checksum: 6c3006c4031d74d54c0aa7d74bdd90dd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 i
摘要 ii Abstract iii 目錄 v 圖目錄 vii 表目錄 x 第一章 緒論 1 1.1 研究背景 1 1.2 研究動機與目的 2 1.3 研究流程與論文架構 2 第二章 文獻回顧 5 2.1 糧食與資源使用現況 5 2.1.1 糧食 5 2.1.2 能源 8 2.1.3 水... 11 2.2 臺灣農業發展與資源使用現況 14 2.3 糧食—能源—水鏈結 18 2.4 生命週期評估 23 2.4.1 生命週期評估方法介紹 24 2.4.2 衝擊評估模式介紹 26 2.5 水足跡評估 27 2.5.1 水足跡網絡 (Water Footprint Network, WFN) 評估方法 28 2.5.2 ISO 14046 水足跡評估方法 33 2.5.3 WFN與ISO 14046水足跡評估方法之差異 36 2.5.4 稀缺性水足跡之評估方法 37 2.6 脫鉤指標分析 40 第三章 研究方法 46 3.1 研究區域背景 46 3.2 生命週期評估 47 3.2.1 目標及範疇界定 48 3.2.2 盤查清單 50 3.2.3 衝擊評估方法 51 3.3 水足跡評估 54 3.3.1 目標及範疇界定 54 3.3.2 水足跡盤查清單 55 3.3.3 水足跡衝擊評估方法 60 3.4 脫鉤指標分析 61 第四章 結果與討論 66 4.1 糧食之生命週期評估結果 66 4.2 糧食生產之能源相關環境衝擊結果 84 4.3 ISO 14046稀缺性水足跡評估結果 91 4.4 糧食生產之脫鉤指標分析結果 93 第五章 結論與建議 99 5.1 結論 99 5.2 建議 101 參考文獻 102 附錄一、糧食之盤查清單 110 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 脫鉤指標分析與生命週期評估法探討糧食、能源與水鏈結之環境效益研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Decoupling Indicators and Life Cycle Assessment of the Food, Energy and Water Nexus | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 駱尚廉,李孟珊 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 糧食永續生產,糧食—能源—水鏈結,生命週期評估,ISO 14046稀缺性水足跡評估,脫鉤指標分析, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Sustainable food production,Food-Energy-Water nexus,Life cycle assessment,ISO 14046 water footprint,Decoupling indicator, | en |
dc.relation.page | 120 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201903296 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2019-08-13 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 工學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 環境工程學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 環境工程學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-108-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 5.36 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。