請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21633
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 駱尚廉 | |
dc.contributor.author | Chung-Chun Hsu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 許中駿 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T03:40:30Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2019-07-15 | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2019-07-03 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 英文文獻
Baral, A. (2009). Summary report on low carbon fuel-related standards. International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT). Bianco, N., & Litz, F. (2011). Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. World Resources Institute . Cantono, S., Heijungs R., & Kleijn, R. (2008). Environmental accounting of eco-innovations through environmental input-output analysis: the case of hydrogen and fuel cell buses. Economic Systems Research, 20(3), 303-318. Casler, S.D., & Blair, P.D. (1997). Economic structure, fuel combustion, and pollution emissions. Ecological Economics, 22(1), 19-27. Chung, W.S., Tohno, S., & Shim, S.Y. (2009). An estimation of energy and GHG emission intensity caused by energy consumption in Korea: An energy IO approach. Applied Energy, 86(10), 1902-1914. De Beer, J., Harnisch, J., & Kerssemeeckers, M. (1999). Greenhouse gas emissions from iron and steel production (Report No. PH3/30). Ecofys, the Netherlands. Hidalgo, I., Szabo, L., Ciscar, J.C., & Soria, A. (2005). Technological prospects and CO2 emission trading analyses in the iron and steel industry: a global model. Energy, 30(5), 583-610. IEA (2016). 20 Years of Carbon Capture and Storage. International Energy Agency, Paris, France. Junichiro, O., Keigo, A., Fuminori, S., & Toshimasa, T. (2007). Diffusion of energy efficient technologies and CO2 emission reductions in iron and steel sector. Energy Economics, 29(4), 868-888. Junichiro, O., Keigo, A., Fuminori, S., & Takashi, H. (2009). Diffusion of CCS and energy efficient technologies in power and iron & steel sectors. Energy Procedia, 1(1), 155-161. Kuckshinrichs, W., Kronenberg, T., & Hansen, P. (2010). The social return on investment in the energy efficiency of buildings in Germany. Energy Policy, 38(8), 4317-4329. Kesicki, F., & Strachan, N. (2011). Marginal abatement cost (MAC) curves: confronting theory and practice. Environmental Science & Policy, 14(8), 1195-1204. Lars, M., & Ottar, M. (2004). Climate policy and the steel industry: achieving global emissions reductions by incomplete climate agreement. Energy, 25(4), 91-114. Lehr, U., Lutz, C., & Edler, D. (2012). Green jobs? Economic impacts of renewable energy in Germany. Energy Policy, 47, 358-364. Murphy, R., & Jaccard, M. (2011). Energy efficiency and the cost of GHG abatement : A comparison of bottom-up and hybrid models for the US. Energy Policy, 39(11), 7146-7155. Matthias, R., & Amato, A. (2002). Vintage structure dynamics and climate change policies: the case of US iron and steel. Energy Policy, 30(7), 541-552. Markaki, M., Belegri-Roboli, A., Michaelides, P., Mirasgedis, S., & Lalas, D.P. (2013). The impact of clean energy investments on the Greek economy: An input–output analysis (2010–2020). Energy Policy, 57, 263-275. Moreno, B., & Lopez, A.J. (2008). The effect of renewable energy on employment. The case of Asturias (Spain). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12(3), 732-751. Moffatt, I., & Hanley, N. (2001). Modelling sustainable development: systems dynamic and input-output approaches. Environmental Modelling and Software, 16(6), 545-557. McKinsey & Company (2009). National cost curve reports. McKinsey & Company, Taipei. Othman, J., Othman, R., & Md Nor, N.G. (2006). Welfare impacts of air quality changes in Malaysia: The hedonic pricing approach. Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, 40, 47-58. OECD/IEA (2000). An initial view on methodologies for emission baselines: iron and steel case study. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France. Price, L., Sinton, J., Worrell, E., Phylipsen, D., Xiulian, H., & Ji, L. (2002). Energy use and carbon dioxide emissions from steel production in China. Energy, 27(5), 429-446. Parry, M., Canziani, O., Palutikof, J., van der Linden, P., & Hanson, C. (2007). Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. IPCC Secretariat. Pollin, R., Heintz, J., & Garrett-Peltier, H. (2009). The economic benefits of investing in clean energy: How the economic stimulus program and new legislation can boost U.S. economic growth and employment. Center for American Progress. Randall, A., Ives, B., & Eastman, C. (1974). Bidding game for valuation of aesthetic environmental improvements. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1(2), 132-149. Sodsai, P., & Rachdawong, P. (2012). The current situation on CO2 emissions from the steel industry in Thailand and mitigation options. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 6, 48-55. Schott, C. (2009). Socio-economic dynamics of biofuel development in Asia pacific. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES) Indonesia Office. Sun, W.Q., Cai, J.J., Mao, H.J., & Guan, D.J. (2011). Change in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from energy use in China’s iron and steel Industry. Journal of Iron and Steel Research, 18(6), 31-36. Schaeffer, M., Kram, T., Meinshausen, M., van Vuuren, D.P., & Hare, W.L. (2008). Near-linear cost increase to reduce climate-change risk. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(52), 20621-20626. Urge-Vorsatz, D., Arena, D., Herrero, S.T., & Butcher, A. (2010). Employment impacts of a large-scale deep building energy retrofit programme in Hungary. Central European University. Wang, K., Wang, C., Lu, X., & Chen, J. (2007). Scenario analysis on CO2 emissions reduction potential in China’s iron and steel industry. Energy Policy, 35(4), 2320-2335. Worrell, E., Martin, N., & Price, L. (2001). Energy efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions reduction opportunities in the US iron and steel sector. Energy, 26(5), 513-536. Yeonbae, K., & Worrell, E. (2002). International comparison of CO2 emission trends in the iron and steel industry. Energy Policy, 30(10), 827-838. Yan, M.R., & Chien, K.M. (2013). Evaluating the economic performance of high-technology industry and energy efficiency: A case study of science parks in Taiwan. Energies, 6(2), 973-987. 中文文獻 行政院環保署,1996,台灣大都會地區改善空氣品質之經濟效益評估與酸雨風險認知調查研究計畫,臺北市。 陳玫如,2003,整合溫室氣體減量與經濟發展之電力供給規劃模型研究,國立臺北大學自然資源與環境管理研究所。 林幸君、王智薇,2006,我國新能源產業之產業關聯分析,台灣經濟研究月刊,29(7),55-61。 左峻德、朱浩、王智薇,2006,我國氫能源與燃料電池產業經濟效益分析-以燃料電池為例,第一屆氫能與燃料電池學術研討會暨兩岸三地氫能論壇。 楊健寧,2008,德國能源政策及減碳措施之借鏡-簡介整合能源及氣候計畫,通識教育中心,中原大學。 國科會,2012,台灣溫室氣體減量進程與綠能產業,臺北市。 中山科學研究院,2012,高導熱碳材市場調查與產業發展規劃,桃園。 吳一民,2013,中鋼節能減碳目標、策略及推動方式,清碳聯盟啟動大會及研討會,臺北。 經濟部統計處,2013,產業經濟統計簡訊,臺北市。 台灣經濟研究院,2013,CO2地質封存關鍵技術建立與應用研究,臺北市。 廖孟儀,2015,廢棄物投入產出評估台灣推動二次銅循環再利用之研究,國立臺灣大學環境工程學研究所。 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21633 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 鋼鐵業是世界上最大的能源密集產業之一,其佔了全球二氧化碳排放的5%。世界鋼鐵協會(Worldsteel)於2008年提出在鋼鐵生產上,能源成本,涵蓋熱和電,通常佔總生產成本的20%~40%。若實行節能措施,將能有效節省鋼鐵生產過程中必要支出成本的花費。而決策者常面臨的問題是能源密集型產業二氧化碳減排的成本效益問題,有越來越多的文獻研究調查國家或地區投資清潔能源技術的經濟影響。
本研究主要採取專家評估法,進一步建立低碳技術經濟模型(bottom-up model),規劃及預測台灣鋼鐵業減碳成本曲線,篩選適合短、中、長期各階段發展的減碳選項推動的優先順序。依據減碳成本曲線的結果,挑選出減碳潛力及減碳成本最高的技術,納入二氧化碳減量在總體經濟分析中的考量,採用投入產出分析方法,研究該技術投入後所帶動的經濟影響。結果顯示,減碳成本最低的減碳措施是能源效率改善-高爐/轉爐煉鋼(高爐頂壓力回收渦輪機)和能源效率改善-軋鋼處理(熱進爐);最高的則是碳捕集與封存(CCS)和熔融還原。至2020年後開始,可用的減碳措施相較於2015年來說明顯增加,至2030年平均減碳成本大幅提高,主要是採用了減碳成本高的CCS技術的結果。 因CCS為減碳潛力及減碳成本最高的技術,也是最具挑戰及對產業影響較大的技術,故以此技術作為產業經濟帶動及關連影響的代表性技術,進一步做燃燒後捕集設備投入產出分析研究。結果顯示,鋼鐵業若發展燃燒後捕集設備的建置,其最終需要的變動,將帶動所有產業的供給(產出)增加,並且除了機械設備、化學材料、電腦、電子及光學產品、專業、科學及技術服務、營造工程等產業為建置燃燒後捕集設備必須投入的業別,將會帶動其中間投入增加外,另外在其它產業的中間投入帶動影響上,以礦產、鋼鐵、電子零組件、批發及零售的中間投入增加幅度最為明顯。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | The steel industry is the largest energy consuming manufacturing sector in the world as well as one of the most important sources of CO2 emissions. It accounts for 5% of the global CO2 emissions. In iron and steel production, energy costs, including heat and electricity, usually account for 20%~40% of the total production cost. If energy saving measures are implemented, it will be able to effectively save the cost of steel production process. Policy makers face to questions about the costs and effectiveness of assessing CO2 emission mitigation options. There is a growing number of studies worldwide aiming at investigating the broader economic implications of investing in clean energy technologies at a national or a regional level.
This study establishes an bottom-up model, plans and predicts the carbon abatement cost curve of the Taiwanese steel industry, and screens the priorities for carbon abatement options that are suitable for short-term, immediate, and long-term development. According to the results of the carbon abatement cost curve, the technology with the highest carbon abatement potential and carbon abatement cost is selected, and the consideration of CO2 reduction in the macroeconomics analysis is included. The input-output analysis method is used to study the economic impact driven by the technology input. The results suggested that the lowest abatement cost of abatement lever are blast furnace top-pressure recovery turbine and hot charging, the highest abatement cost of abatement lever are CCS and smelt reduction. By 2020, the available abatement lever will increase significantly compared to 2015, and the abatement cost will increase significantly by 2030, mainly due to the adoption of CCS technology with high abatement cost. Because CCS is the most challenging and influential technology to the industry. Therefore, it is used as a representative technology for industrial economic driving and related influences, and plant to do input-output analysis of post-combustion capture systems. The results suggested that if the construction of post-combustion capture systems are developing, the changes in final demand will drive the supply of all industries to increase. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T03:40:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-D00541009-1.pdf: 2371066 bytes, checksum: cb5b85fcffa5cadfad2ce942331c04a5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章 研究背景 1
1.1研究緣起 1 1.2研究目的 3 1.3研究內容 4 第二章 文獻回顧 5 2.1鋼鐵業的二氧化碳排放與節能減碳探討 5 2.2 國內外節能減碳模型應用探討 7 2.3 低碳技術經濟分析探討 12 2.4 投入產出(I-O)應用探討 14 2.5 空氣品質影響效益與費用評價探討 17 第三章 研究流程與方法 20 3.1 研究流程 20 3.2 研究工具 22 3.2.1減碳成本曲線方法 22 3.2.2投入產出分析方法 23 第四章 鋼鐵業製程能耗與排碳分析 26 4.1生產活動量分析 26 4.2製程特性和能流 29 4.3二氧化碳排放量及排放密度推估 32 第五章 低碳技術經濟模型建置與分析討論 33 5.1模型建構的基本假設 33 5.2基礎情境假設和計算邏輯 36 5.3減碳情境假設和計算邏輯 42 5.4模型結果分析 47 第六章 投入產出方法建置與分析 54 6.1鋼鐵業燃燒後捕集設備作為投入產出研究標的之探討 54 6.2鋼鐵業建置燃燒後捕集設備基本假設 55 6.2.1設備裝設位置與裝設規模 55 6.2.2設備造價推估 56 6.3燃燒後捕集設備投資費用分析 61 6.3.1中間投入國產、進口結構及類別對應 61 6.3.2設備成本結構建立 65 6.4燃燒後捕集設備投入產出結果分析 66 第七章 結論與建議 71 7.1 結論 71 7.2 建議 73 第八章 參考文獻 74 附錄、減碳情境各減碳措施使用之參數值整理 79 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 能源密集型產業低碳技術經濟與投入產出方法分析研究-以鋼鐵業為例 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Analysis on Technology of Low-Carbon Economy and Input-output Method in Energy-intensive Industries: Taking Steel Industry as an Example | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 談駿嵩,樊國恕,鄒倫,楊浩彥 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 低碳技術經濟模型,投入產出分析,能源密集型產業,減碳成本曲線,燃燒後捕集設備, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | bottom-up model,Input-output analysis,Energy intensive industry,Carbon abatement cost curve,post-combustion capture systems, | en |
dc.relation.page | 83 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201901174 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2019-07-03 | |
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 | 2.32 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。