請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/64176
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 闕蓓德 | |
dc.contributor.author | Yen-Yu Lin | en |
dc.contributor.author | 林彥妤 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-16T17:33:28Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2017-08-17 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2012-08-17 | |
dc.date.issued | 2012 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2012-08-15 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Arvanitoyannis, I. S. (2008) ISO 14040: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) – Principles and Guidelines. Waste Management for the Food Industries, 97-132.
Bare, J. C.; Hofstetter, P.; Pennington, D. W.; Udo de Haes, H. A. (2000) Midpoints versus endpoints: The sacrifices and benefits. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 5, 319-326. Berglund, M.; Borjesson, P. (2006) Assessment of energy performance in the life-cycle of biogas production. Biomass and Bioenergy, 30, 254-266. Bergman P. C. A.; Boersma A. R.; Zwart R. W. R.; Kiel J. H. A. (2005) Torrefaction for biomass co-firing in existing coal-fired power stations. Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN), p. 72. Berndes, G.; Hoogwijk, M.; van den Broek, R. (2003) The contribution of biomass in the future global energy supply: a review of 17 studies. Biomass and Bioenergy, 25, 1-28. Bhattacharya, S. C.; Abdul Salam, P.; Runqing, H.; Somashekar, H. I.; Racelis, D. A.; Rathnasiri, P. G.; Yingyuad, R. (2005) An assessment of the potential for non-plantation biomass resources in selected Asian countries for 2010. Biomass and Bioenergy, 29, 153-166. Bjorklund, A. E. (2002) Survey of Approaches to Improve Reliability in LCA. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 7, 64-72. Bruijstens, A. J. (2008) Biogas Composition and Engine Performance, Including Database and Biogas Property Model, Project supported by the European Commission Under RTD contract : 019795. Chen, W. C.; Geng, D. S. (2008) The Strategy and Bioenergy Potential for Kitchen Waste Recycling in Taiwan. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Management., 18, 281-287. Cleveland, C. J.; Costanza, R.; Hall, C. A. S.; Kaufmann, R. (1984) Energy and the U.S. economy: a biophysical perspective. Science, 225, 890-897. Curran, M. A. (2008) Life-Cycle Assessment. Human Ecology, 8, 2168-2174. Damartzis, T.; Zabaniotou, A. (2011) Thermochemical conversion of biomass to second generation biofuels through integrated process design—A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15, 366-378. Demirbaş, A. (2001) Biomass Resource Facilities and Biomass Conversion Processing for Fuels and Chemicals. Energy Conversion and Management, 42, 1357-1378. Dwivedi, P.; Alavalapati, J. R. R.; Lal, P. (2009) Cellulosic ethanol production in the United States: Conversion technologies, current production status, economics, and emerging developments. Energy for Sustainable Development, 13, 174-182. Giampietro M.; Ulgiati S.; Pimentel D. (1997) Feasibility of Large-Scale Biofuel Production. BioScience, 47, 587-600. Grabnera, M.; Morsteinb, O.; Rappoldc, D.; Gunsterd, W.; Beysele, G.; Meyera, B. (2010) Constructability study on a German reference IGCC power plant with and without CO2-capture for hard coal and lignite. Energy Conversion and Management, 51, 2179-2187. Hammerschlag, R. (2006) Ethanol's Energy Return on Investment: A Survey of Literature1990-Present. Environmental Science & Technology, 40, 1744-1750. Harasimowicz, M.; Orluk, P.; Zakrzewska-Trznadel, G.; Chmielewski, A. G. (2007) Application of polyimide membranes for biogas purification and enrichment. Journal of hazardous materials, 144, 698-702. Heinimo, J.; Junginger, M. (2009) Production and trading of biomass for energy – An overview of the global status. Biomass and Bioenergy, 33, 1310-1320. Hills, D. J.; Roberts, D. W. (1981) Anaerobic digestion of dairy manure and field crop residues. Agricultural Wastes, 3, 179-189. Hofstetter, P. (1998) Perspectives in Life Cycle Impact Assessment- A Structured Approach to Combine Models of the Technosphere, Ecosphere and Valuesphere. Hoogwijk, M. (2003) Exploration of the ranges of the global potential of biomass for energy. Biomass and Bioenergy. ISO. (1993) Guide of the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, GUM. Jolli, D.; Giljum, S. (2005) Unused biomass extraction in agriculture, forestry and fishery. Jolliet, O.; Margni, M.; Charles, R.; Humbert, S.; Payet, J.; Rebitzer, G.; Rosenbaum, R. (2003) IMPACT 2002+: A New Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 8, 324-330. Junfeng, L.; Runqing, H.; Yanqin, S.; Jingli, S.; Bhattacharya, S. C.; Abdul Salam, P. (2005) Assessment of sustainable energy potential of non-plantation biomass resources in China. Biomass and Bioenergy, 29, 167-177. Karpenstein-Machan, M. (2007) Bioenergy Village-Sustainable Concepts for Energy in Action, International Conference on Bioenergy, Tallinn, Estonia. Kim, H.; Choi, B. (2010) The effect of biodiesel and bioethanol blended diesel fuel on nanoparticles and exhaust emissions from CRDI diesel engine. Renewable Energy, 35, 157-163. Koh, M. T.; Chiu, T. H.; Hong, C. M.; Chung, P. (1988) Recent development in biogas and utilization in Taiwan. Proceeding of the utilization and poultry manure., FFTC EB.279, 1-12. Kucuk, M. M.; Demirbaş, A. (1997) Biomass conversion processes Energy Conversion and Management, 38, 151-165. Li, S. M.; Wei, Y. J.; Zhang, X. J. ; Zhao, L. C.; Da-lei, Z. (2008) Research on the biogas production from lignocellulocsic material. Renewable Energy, 26, 1, 50-54. Lynd, L. R.; Wyman, C. E.; Tillman U. (1999) Bioprocess Engineering and Biobased Industrial Products. Biotechnology Progress, 15, 777-793. Metropolis, N.; Ulam, S. (1949) The Monte Carlo method. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 44, 335-341. McKendry, P. (2002) Energy Production from Biomass (Part 1): Overview of Biomass. Bioresource Technology, 83, 37-46. Miller, G. T. Jr. (2000) Environmental Science, National Institute for Compilation and Translation, 15-22. Morey, R. V. (2006) biomass for electricity and process heat at ethanol plants. applied engineering in agriculture, 22, 723-728. Mulder, K.; Hagens, N. J. (2008) Energy Return on Investment Toward a Consistent Framework. A Journal of the Human Environment, 37, 74-79. Murphy, D. J.; Hall, C. A. S. (2010) Year in review—EROI or energy return on (energy) invested. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1185, 102-118. Ostrem, K. (2004) Greening Waste: Anaerobic Digestion for Treating the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Wastes, Department of Earth and Environmental Engineering. Columbia University. Owens, J. W. (1996) LCA Impact Assessment Categories Technical Feasibility and Accuracy. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 1, 151-158. Pawelzik, P. F.; Zhang, Q. (2012) Evaluation of environmental impacts of cellulosic ethanol using life cycle assessment with technological advances over time. Biomass and Bioenergy. Prins, M. J.; Ptasinski, K. J.; Janssen, F. J. J. G. (2006) More efficient biomass gasification via torrefaction. Energy, 31, 3458-3470. Rajeshwari, K.V.; Balakrishnan, M.; Kansal, A.; Lata, K.; Kishore, V. V. N. (2000) State of the art of anaerobic digestion technology for industrial wastewater treatment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 4, 135-156. Rasi, S.; Veijanen, A.; Rintala, J. (2007) Trace compounds of biogas from different biogas production plants. Energy, 32, 1375-1380. Sagastume Gutierrez, A.; Van Caneghem, J.; Cogollos Martinez, J. B.; Vandecasteele, C. (2012) Evaluation of the environmental performance of lime production in Cuba. Journal of Cleaner Production, 31, 126-136. Sajjakulnukit, B.; Yingyuad, R.; Maneekhao, V.; Pongnarintasut, V.; Bhattacharya, S. C.; Abdul Salam, P. (2005) Assessment of sustainable energy potential of non-plantation biomass resources in Thailand. Biomass and Bioenergy, 29, 214-224. Sebastian, F.; Royo, J.; Gomez, M. (2010) Cofiring versus biomass-only power plants: GHG emissions savings comparison among different biomass resources utilisation by means of LCA. Energy. SETAC. (1993) Guidelines for Life-Cycle Assessment: A 'Code of Practice'. Brussels: SETAC-Brochure. Brussels: SETAC. Sheehan, J.; Aden, A.; Paustian, K.; Killian, K.; Brenner, J.; Walsh, M.; Nelson, R. (2004) Energy and environmental aspects of using corn stover for fuel ethanol. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 7, 117-146. Slade, R.; Bauen, A.; Shah, N. (2009) The greenhouse gas emissions performance of cellulosic ethanol supply chains in Europe. Biotechnology for biofuels, 2, 15. Steubing, B.; Zah, R.; Christian. (2012) Heat, Electricity, or Transportation? The Optimal Use of Residual and Waste Biomass in Europe from an Environmental Perspective. Environmental Science & Technology, 46, 164-171. Steubing, B.; Zah, R.; Waeger, P.; Ludwig, C. (2010) Bioenergy in Switzerland: Assessing the domestic sustainable biomass potential. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14, 2256-2265. Tabatabaei, M.; Rahim, R. A.; Abdullah, N.; Wright, A.-D. G.; Shirai, Y.; Sakai, K.; Sulaiman, A.; Hassan, M. A. (2010) Importance of the methanogenic archaea populations in anaerobic wastewater treatments. Process Biochemistry, 45, 1214-1225. Tian, W.; Liao, C.; Li, L.; Zhao, D. (2011) Life cycle assessment of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of cellulosic ethanol from corn stover. Chinese Journal of Biotechnology, 27, 516-525. Tsai, W.T.; Lin, C.I. (2009) Overview analysis of bioenergy from livestock manure management in Taiwan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13, 2682-2688. Tukker, A. (1998) Uncertainty in Life Cycle Assessment of Toxic Release. Practical Experience-Argument for a Reductionalistic Approach? . International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 3, 246-258. Tukker, A. (2000) Life cycle assessment as a tool in environmental impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20, 435-456. Vilniškis, R.; Baltrėnas P.; Vasarevičius, S.; Baltrėnaitė, E. (2011) research and assessment of biogas evolved during anaerobic digestion of biodegradable agricultural waste. ecological chemistry and engineering, 18, 409-427. Wihersaari, M. (2005) Greenhouse gas emissions from final harvest fuel chip production in Finland. Biomass and Bioenergy 28, 435-443. Wu, K.T.; Tsai, C.J.; Chen, C.S.; Chen, H.W. (2012) The characteristics of torrefied microalgae. Applied Energy. Yan, S. L.; Tanaka. (2006) Ethanol fermentation from biomass resources: current state and prospects. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 69, 627-642. Zah, R.; Faist, M.; Reinhard, J.; Birchmeier, D. (2009) Standardized and simplified life-cycle assessment (LCA) as a driver for more sustainable biofuels. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17, S102-S105. Zheng, Y.; Pan, Z. L.; Zhang, R. (2009) Overview of biomass pretreatment for cellulosic ethanol production. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 2, 51-67. Zhong, W.; Zhang, Z.; Qiao, W.; Fu, P.; Liu, M. (2011) Comparison of chemical and biological pretreatment of corn straw for biogas production by anaerobic digestion. Renewable Energy, 36, 1875-1879. Zimmermann, H. J. (2000) An application-oriented view of modeling uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, 122, 190-198. 王文堯. (2007) 廚餘能源化處理之生命週期評估, 自然資源與環境管理研究所. 國立台北大學. 行政院農委會. (2010) 農業統計年報. 高士忠. (2008) 不同粒徑對玉米秸稈厭氧發酵影響的試驗研究. 河南農業大學學報, 42, 327-329. 許富翔. (2011) 稻稈焙燒產製生質煤炭之生命週期評估, 環境工程學研究所. 國立台灣大學. 黃柏璋. (2010) 結合生命週期評估探討廚餘處理之最佳化模式. 楊萬發; 馬鴻文; 楊盛行; 鄭正勇; 陳文卿; 洪明龍. (2002) 廚餘及堆肥成品中有害成分調查、肥力及土壤列管評估計畫暨廚餘資源化設施、產品品質標準建制及市場開發近、中程策略規劃. 台北巿環保局. 經濟部能源局. (2010) 能源統計手冊. 簡宣裕; 張明暉; 劉禎祺. (2007) 木質纖維素產生能源方法之探討. 行政院農業委員會農業試驗所. 魏佩如. (2010) 產品碳足跡計算不確定性分析之研究, 環境工程與管理研究所. 國立台北科技大學. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/64176 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 台灣為一個能源缺乏的國家,99%的能源仰賴進口,2010年能源自給率僅達0.7%,政府制定新的能源政策時亦將生質能源之發展應用作為重點項目,以期提高國內再生能源之比例。然而針對刻意栽種之生質作物有與糧食作物爭地之疑慮,故本研究以殘餘生質物作為研究對象,包括稻稈、玉米稈、廚餘、豬糞尿,統計2010年上述廢棄物在台灣之數量,計算其能源潛能。利用生命週期方法評估五個生質能案例之環境衝擊與效益,以及計算其能源投資報酬(r_E)值(稻稈焙燒生質炭燃燒發電、玉米稈酵素水解產製纖維酒精、玉米稈混豬糞尿產製生質沼氣、廚餘混豬糞尿產製生質沼氣、沼氣發電);此外亦評估了化石能系統之燃煤發電供應鏈、95無鉛汽油供應鏈、天然氣供應鏈三個案例,用於比較生質能源取代化石能源之衝擊減量效益。評估工具為生命週期評估軟體SimaPro 7.2,盤查分析則使用文獻回顧及軟體內建Ecoinvent資料庫,再經IMPACT 2002+評估模式量化其潛在衝擊。結果顯示,稻稈生質炭燃燒發電案例對於全球暖化類別的衝擊最高;玉米稈纖維酒精案例對於非再生能源類別的衝擊最高;玉米稈混豬糞尿產製生質沼氣案例、廚餘混豬糞尿產製生質沼氣案以及沼氣發電案例均以吸入性無機物類別的衝擊最高。溫室氣體減量部分,生質沼氣三個案例皆具減量效益,纖維酒精及生質炭生產過程雖不具減量效益,然而纖維酒精納入汽車使用階段、生質炭僅計算燃燒發電階段亦具有減量效益。能源投資報酬部分各案例之r_E值皆>1,表示皆具有能源效益。生質能系統在非再生能源損耗項目顯著優於化石能源系統,整體之環境衝擊亦較化石能源輕微,然而在其他衝擊類別(如臭氧耗竭)卻可能造成更高的衝擊,雖然本研究取得之資料與評估方式存在諸多不確定因子,仍建議決策者必須考量各種環境衝擊適當權重,以評估生質能的淨環境效益。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Taiwan is a country with an energy shortage. Ninety-nine percent of Taiwanese energy is imported, and the energy self-sufficiency rate in 2010 was merely 0.7%. Therefore, when the government develops new energy policies, the development of biomass energy should be a crucial project to increase the proportion of domestic renewable energy.While the first generation biomass may threatening food supplies, this study only explores the issues of residual biomass, including straw, corn stover, kitchen waste, pig manure. The amount of waste mentioned above in 2010 is calculated to estimate its energy potential. Furthermore, a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach is used to evaluate the impacts and benefits of five biomass cases on the environment and to calculate the energy return on investment rate (r_E). ((1) generating electricity by torrified biocoal (2) enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover cellulosic ethanol (3) biogas production from kitchen waste mix pig manure (4) biogas production from corn stover mix pig manure (5) generating electricity by biogas.) Environmental benefits were also evaluated by comparing with 3 fossil reference system: generating electricity by imported hardcoal, unleaded 95 petrol supply chain, and natural gas supply chain for domestic heating. Inventories came from Ecoinvent database and literature review. Environmental analyses were carried out using a SimaPro 7.2 LCA software and adopting the IMPACT 2002+ methodology for evaluation of potential environmental impact. Results showed that, the case of terrified biocoal had the highest environmental impact in categories of global warming, the case of cellulosic ethanol had the highest environmental impact in categories of non-renewable energy, other three cases of biogas related had the highest environmental impact in categories of respiratory inorganics. Comparing to reference system about greenhouse gas emission reduction, all biogas cases, firing stage in biocoal case and car-use stage included in cellulosic ethanol case were beneficial to reduction. Regarding to energy return on investment, r_E value for all cases are > 1, that means they at least capture some renewable energy value with our nonrenewable investment. Although bioenergy system had less environmental impact than fossil energy system, especially on non-renewable energy consumption; however causes higher impact on other impact categories. Besides, there were many uncertain factors in the data acquired by this study and evaluative methodology. Policy makers should consider the appropriate weights for the different types of environmental impacts to evaluate the net environmental benefit of biomass energy. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-16T17:33:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-101-R99541205-1.pdf: 4294159 bytes, checksum: 9f915488126fb4e46904e3c6c2a4a09e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 摘要 i
Abstract ii 目錄 iv 圖目錄 vi 表目錄 viii 第一章 緒論 1 1-1研究動機 1 1-2研究目的 2 1-3研究流程與論文架構 3 第二章 文獻回顧 5 2-1生質能源 5 2-1-1生質能 5 2-1-2生質潛能 6 2-1-3殘餘生質物 7 2-1-4生質料源轉化途徑 12 2-1-5我國生質能應用現況 19 2-2生命週期評估 21 2-2-1生命週期評估起源與應用 21 2-2-2生命週期環境衝擊評估方法 23 2-2-3生命週期評估應用在生質能源上 28 2-3不確定性分析 28 2-3-1生命週期評估之不確定性分析 29 2-4 能源投資報酬 30 第三章 材料與方法 33 3-1生質能系統與比較系統之生命週期評估方法 33 3-1-1目標與範疇界定 33 3-1-2盤查分析 36 3-2不確定性分析 47 3-3台灣廢棄生質能源供給面及能源需求面 48 3-3-1台灣殘餘生質能源供給面 48 3-3-2台灣能源需求面 51 3-4能源投資報酬 51 第四章 結果與討論 53 4-1生命週期評估 53 4-1-1纖維酒精評估結果 53 4-1-2生質炭發電評估結果 65 4-1-3生質沼氣評估結果 74 4-2 敏感度分析與不確定性分析 83 4-3 生質能源取代化石能源效益探討 92 第五章 結論與建議 98 5-1 結論 98 5-2 建議 100 參考文獻 102 附錄 108 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 殘餘生質物再利用之能源潛勢與生命週期評估 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Life Cycle Assessment and Energy Potential of Residual Biomass | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 100-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 李公哲,李育民 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 殘餘生質物,生質能轉換,生命週期評估,能源投資報酬, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Residual biomass,Life cycle assessment,Biomass conversion,Energy return on investment, | en |
dc.relation.page | 126 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2012-08-15 | |
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-101-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 4.19 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。