請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/40330完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 鄭欽龍 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Han-Jing Lyu | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 呂涵靜 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-14T16:44:59Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2010-08-04 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2008-08-04 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2008 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2008-07-31 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 丁碧慧等人合譯(2001) 財務管理，滄海書局。
王子定(1966) 應用育林學(下)，台北：中正。 王京明、錢玉蘭和李鈞元(1997) 再生能源發電效益經濟評估。中華經濟研究院。 王松永、張豐丞、李怡真、楊賜霖、林法勤(2005)柳杉疏伐木有效利用之探討。台大實驗林研究報告 19(4)：293-300 田靜波(2004) 台北市內湖垃圾焚化廠之組織轉型：40-45。銘傳大學公共事務學研究所在職專班 碩士論文。 任憶安、陳宛君(1996)。六龜試驗林疏伐作業個案採運成本及疏伐效率分析。台灣林業科學 11(4)：475-480 何美玥(2007) 台灣永續能源政策。行政院經濟建設委員會。 谷雲川、陳信泰和陳榮祖 (1987) 速生樹種木材纖維性質與製漿試驗(一)山黃麻、麻六甲合歡及杉木。林業試驗所研究報告季刊2(4) :319-332 周群、李銘鐘、唐讓雷(2004) 中小徑木的開發利用—造林木圓盤與邊皮材之加工利用。林業研究專訊11(3)：14-17 林向愷(2006) 公共投資計畫與成本效益分析。案例說明(四)財務分析方法要點分析。公共建設計劃經濟效益評估及財務計畫研討會 林務局(1995) 第三次台灣森林資源及土地利用調查：33-86。 林蕙真(2002) 中級會計學新論(上冊)：170-178。証業出版。 邱志明(2006) 疏伐撫育經營策略對森林碳吸存之影響。林業研究專訊13(1)：6-9 姚鶴年(1969) 林木採運規劃：129-181。國立台灣大學。 張銘哲(2004)公有民營垃圾焚化廠運作績效之研究：3。國立中山大學 環境工程所 碩士論文。 郭寶章(2003) 台灣永續性混生林之復育。林業研究專訓10(5)：45-51 湯適謙(2004) 森林作業成本之計算及評估規劃。林業研究專訊11 (5)：16-19 華宜昌(2006) 經濟效益評估-各種評估方式。公共建設計畫經濟效益評估及財務計畫研討會 經濟部能源局 (2007) 汽電共生系統實施辦法。經濟部。 劉榮章(2004) 垃圾焚化爐汽電共生整體效益評估：3-1∼3-10。元智大學機械工程學系 碩士論文。 鄭欽龍(2000)再造林成本與林木伐採決策之分析。中華林學季刊。33(1):81-87。 鄭欽龍、施友元(2006)南投地區承租造林地林木伐採成本之分析。中華林學季刊。39(2)：315-327。 鄭欽龍、陳重銘、陳瑩達(2006)台灣人工林疏伐成本之計量分析。中華林學季刊。39(1)：57-66。 賴建興(2007) 台灣林業經營現狀及展望。行政院農委會林務局。 聯合國氣候變化框架公約 (1998) 工業技術研究院能源與資源研究所編輯。 中央銀行 利率與準備率 http://www.cbc.gov.tw/rates_index.asp 行政院主計處物價統計月報 http://www.dgbas.gov.tw 行政院經建會 中華民國招商網 http://investintaiwan.nat.gov.tw/zh-tw/env/expenses 美國內布拉斯加州能源局 http://www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/66.html Aden A.,M. Ruth,K. lbsen,j. jechura, K. Neeves, J. Sheehan, and B. Wallace (2002) lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol process design and economics utilizing co-current dilute acid prehydrolysis and enzymatic hydrolysis for corn stover. NREL TP-510-32438. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Bain R. L.(2005) An overview of bioenergy technologies innovation for our energy future. Group Manager, Thermochemical Conversion Natioal Bioenergy Certer Golden, Colorado, USA, National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Barrañon D. C. C.(2006) Methanol and hydrogen production energy and cost analysis. Master’s Thesis 2006:54 PB. Division of Energy Engineering, Depatment of Applied Physics, Mechanical and Material Engineering , Luleå University of Technology S-971 87 Luleå Sweden:31-33 Bass S.,O. Dubols, P.M. Moura, M. Pinard, R. Tipper and C. Wilson (2000) Rural livelihoods and carbon management. International Institute for Environment and Development（IIED）Natural Resources Issues Paper 1:6-11 Bergman R.and J. Zerbe (2004) Primer on wood biomass for energy. Forest Products Laboratory., USDA Forest Service ,Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, Wisconsin. Brännlund R., P. O. Marklund and M. Sjöström (2004) Evaluating market efficiency without price data:the Swedish market for wood fuel. Applied Economics 36 :31-39 Burtraw D., K. Palmer, and D. Kahn (2005) Allocation of CO2 emissions allowances in the regional greenhouse gas cap-and trade program. Discussion Paper. RFF DP. Washington D.C. Caputo A. C., M. Palumbo, P. M. Pelagagge, and F. Scacchia (2005) Economics of biomass energy utilization in combustion and gasification plants: effects of logistic variables. Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (1): 35-51 Chomitz K. and C. Grifftths (2001)An economic analysis and simulation of woodfuel management in the Sahel. Environmental and Economics 19:285-304. Dhuyvetter K. C., T.L. Kastens and T.C. Schroeder (2008) Ethanol Industry－What impact will it have on corn and DGS production. Department of Agricultural Economics Kansas State University. Duke R. and D. M. Kammen (1999)The economics of energy market transformation programs. The Energy Journal 20(4):15-64 Elobeid A. and S. Tokgoz (2006) Removal of U.S. ethanol domestic and trade distortions:impact on U.S. and Brazilian ethanol markets. Working Paper 06-WP 427 .Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University. EPF(2003) Innovative and sustainable use of forest resources, vision 2030. A technology platform initiative by the European forest-based sector. European Panel Federation. Ericsson K., S. Huttunen, L. J. Nilsson , P. Svenningsson (2004) Bioenergy policy and market development in Finland and Sweden . Energy Policy 32: 1707-1721 FAPRI(2007) World biofuels: FAPRI 2007 agriculture outlook.FAPRI : 318-320 Farrell J (2007) Wind and ethanol：economies and diseconomies of scale. New Rules Project of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance Minneapolis. Faúndez P.(2008) Renewable energy in a market-based economy:How to estimate its potential and choose the right incentives. Renewable Energy 33(8) :1768-1774. Field B. C. (1994) Environmental economics : an introducetion. McGraw-Hill. Food and Agricultural Organization（2001）State of the world’s forests 2001 Rome:FAO : 67-71 Fung P.Y.H, M.U.F. Kirschbaum, R.J. Raison, and C. Stucley ( 2002) The potential for bioenergy production from Australian forests : its contribution to national greenhouse targets and recent developments in conversion processes. Biomass and Bioenergy 22 : 223-236 Gallagher P.W., D.M. Otto, and M. Dikeman (2000) Effects of an oxygen requirement for fuel in Midwest ethanol markets and local economics. Review of Agricultural Economics 22(2) : 292-311. Gustavsson L, J.Holmberg, V. Dornburg, R. Sathre, T. Eggers, K. Mahapatra, and G. Marland (2007) Using biomass for climate change mitigateon and oil use reduction .Energy Policy 35:5671-5691 Gustavsson L., T. Karjainen, G.. Marland, I. Savolainen, B. Schlamadinger, M. Apps(2000) Project-based greenhouse –gas accounting: guiding principles with a focus on baselines and additionality .Energy Policy 28:935-946 Hakkila P. (2006) Factors driving the development of forest energy in Finland . Biomass and Bioenergy 30: 281-288 Islas J.,F. Manzini and M. Martínez (2003) Cost-benefit analysis of scenarios for the Mexican power sector. Energy 28: 979-992 Junginger M., A. Faaij, R. Björheden, W.C. Turkenbueg (2005) Technological learing and cost reductions in wood fuel supply chains in Sweden. Biomass and Bioenergy 29: 399-418 Kartha S. and Larson E.D.(2000) Bioenergy primer modernised .Biomass Energy for Sustainable Development. Ch5.Technologies to Convert Biomass into Modern Energy：87-88.United Nations Development Programme United Nations N.Y. USA. Keegan III, C., C. Fiedler, and D. Wichman(1995) Costs associated with harvest activities for major harvest systems in Montana. Forest Products Journal 45(7/8):78-82 Larsson S. (2006) Supply curves of reed canary grass(Phalaris arundinacea L.)in Västerbotten County, northern Sweden , under different EU subsidy schemes”, Biomass and Bioenergy 30 : 28-37 Madlender R. and M. Koller(2007)Economic and CO2 mitigation impacts of promoting biomass heating systems: An input-output study for Vorarlberg, Austria. Energy Policy 35: 6021-6035. Mitchell C.P., A. V. Bridgwater, D. J. Stevens, A. J. Toft, and M. P. Watters (1995) Technologyeconomic assessment of biomass to energy. Biomass and Bioenergy 9: 205-226. Nas T.F. (1996) Cost-benefit analysis theory and application. Sage Pub. Nouni M. R., S.C. Mullick, and T.C. Kandpal (2007) Biomass gasifyer projects for decentralized power supply in India: a financial evaluation. Enegy Policy 35: 1373-1385 Phillips S.,A. Aden, J. Jechura, and D. Dayton (2007) Thermochemical ethanol via indirect gasification and mixed alcohol synthesis of lignocellusic biomass. Technical Report NREL TP-510-41168. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Prasertsan S. and B. Sajjakulnukit (2006) Biomass and biogas energy in Thailand：Potential, opportunity and barriers. Renewable Energy 31:599-610 Sedjo R. A., J. Wisniewski, A. V. Sample, and J. D. Kinsman (1995) The economics of mananging carbon via forestry: assessment of existing studies. Environmental and Resource Economics 6:139-165. Sims R. E. H. and Barber A.(2007) Biofuel production and NZ’s Prospects. AgriLINK New Zealand. Solanky B., A. Sharma, and T.K. Moulik (1997) Sustainable energy: 2012-policy and legislateon.Environmental Resources Management India: 2345-2349 Tharakan.P. J., T. A .Volk, C. A. Lindsey, L. P. Abrahamson , E. H. White (2005) Evaluating the impact of three incentive program on the economics of cofiring willow biomass with coal in New York State ,Energy Policy 33:337-347 Tiffany D.G. and Eidman V.R.(2003) Factors Associated with Success of Fuel Ethanol Producers. Staff Paper Series Staff Paper P03-7 Department of Applied Economics, Collede of Agricultural, food, and Environmental Sciences, University of Minnesota. Tipper R. and W. Mcghee (2005) Climate change and Scotland’s forestry strategy : 1-7. Topic Paper No.1 Edinburgh Center for Carbon Management. Toichi T. (2006) International Energy Security and Japan’s Strategy . Conference on India’s Energy Security Jointly Organized by TERI and the Konrad Adenauer Foundation. The Institution of Energy Economics, Japan. van der Drift A. (2006) Synthesis gas from biomass for fuels and chemicals. Biomass, coal and environmental Research. ECN-C--06-001. Vantine B(2000) Pearson Technologies, Inc. Vollebergh H. (1997) Environmental externalities and social optimality in biomass markets :waste-to-energy in The Netherlands and biofuels in France. Energy Policy 25(6): 605-621. Weight L (2006) Worldwide commercial development of bioenergy with a focus on energy crop-based projects”, Biomass and Bioenergy 30 : 706-714 Zerbe Jr. R.O. and A. S. Bellas (2006) A Primer for Benefit-cost Analysis. Edwad Eldar. EIA national gasoline price. www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_home_page.html. IEA Bioenergy www.ieabioenergy.com/OurWork.aspx NCDER (National Cerner for Environmental Decision-Making Research) www.ncedr.org/tools/othertools/costbenefit/load.htm. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/40330 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 大氣中二氧化碳的濃度快速增加，使全球暖化問題越趨嚴重。此外，隨著石油價格不斷上漲，生物能源成為取代石油的再生能源之一種方法。從文獻得知，森林疏伐不僅有助林地的碳吸存量，亦可供給疏伐木供生產生物能源之用。本研究分別提出利用疏伐木生產酒精和電力兩種方案，並應用成本效益分析以評估此二方案。
本研究發現，疏伐木生產酒精方案較生產電力方案為佳，前者在要求報酬率16%時為淨現值5,575萬元，後者為767萬元。此外，前者之內部報酬率為18.4%，後者為19%。由此可見，疏伐木生產酒精方案經濟上較可行。 另外，本研究以成本效益分析探討政府採用不同補貼措施獎勵以疏伐木生產酒精，其中以低利貸款增加的內部報酬率最高，其為四個補貼方式中為最具效率之措施。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The carbon dioxide in atmosphere had increased rapidly in recent decades, it caused serious global warning problems. Furthermore, current oil price is soaring sharply, and bioenergy becomes one of the alternatives to fossil fuel. According to literature reviews, forest thinning not only can increase carbon sequestration of forestland but also provide wood for producing bioenergy. The study proposed two projects to utilize forest thinning wood to produce ethanol and electricity respectively, then applied cost-benefit analysis to evaluate the two projects.
The study found that the ethanol project of forest thinning wood had higher return than the electricity project. At 16% required rate of return, the ethanol project had net present value of 55.75 million NT dollars, the electricity project had 7.7 million NT dollars. Furthermore, the ethanol project had 18.4% internal rate of return, the electricity project 19%. The comparison indicated the ethanol project is more feasible economically. Besides, this study used cost-benefit analysis to evaluate different subsidy measures for promotion of using forest thinning wood to produce ethanol. It found the form of grants is the most effective measure in terms of the maximum the internal rate of return of the four subsidy regime. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-14T16:44:59Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-97-R94625011-1.pdf: 637161 bytes, checksum: 887535e60a6453cfefecf1cb2688fa53 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝誌...................................................i
中文摘要...............................................ii 英文摘要...............................................iii 表目錄 .................................................v 圖目錄..................................................vii 第一章 緒論 ......................................... ..1 第一節、研究背景 ........................................1 第二節、研究目的 ........................................2 第三節、研究流程 ........................................3 第二章 文獻回顧 ........................................5 第一節、林業部門的經營策略對疏伐木產量的影響 ............5 第二節、生物能源之技術經濟評估 ..........................9 第三章 研究方法 .......................................22 第一節、研究理論 .......................................22 第二節、研究架構 .......................................25 第四章 以疏伐木生產酒精和發電之成本效益分析 ...........31 第一節、台灣國有人工林疏伐木供給之推估..................33 第二節、以疏伐木當作焚化廠發電燃料之方案的成本效益分析..40 第三節、以疏伐木生產酒精的方案之成本效益分析 ...........56 第四節、酒精方案和發電方案之比較 .......................73 第五節、補貼措施之探討 .................................76 第六節、討論 ...........................................80 第五章 結論與建議 .....................................83 參考文獻 ...............................................86 附錄 ...................................................92 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.title | 台灣疏伐木生產酒精和電力之成本效益分析 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | A Cost-Benefit Analysis on Production of Ethanol and Electricity from Forest Thinning Wood in Taiwan | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 96-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 楊增華,王兆桓,王培蓉 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 生物能源,森林疏伐,疏伐木,電力,酒精,成本效益分析,補貼, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | bioenergy,forest thinning,forest thinning wood,electricity,ethanol,cost-benefit analysis,subsidy, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 95 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2008-08-01 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 森林環境暨資源學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 森林環境暨資源學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-97-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 622.23 kB | 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。