請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/67328
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 闕蓓德(Pei-Te Chiueh) | |
dc.contributor.author | Nung-Chiao Huang | en |
dc.contributor.author | 黃農喬 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T01:28:02Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-09-01 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2020-09-22 | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2020-08-16 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Ally, J., Pryor, T., Pigneri, A. (2015) The Role Of Hydrogen In Australia's Transport Energy Mix. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 40, 4426- 4441. Al-Thawadi, F. E., Al-Ghamdi, S. G. (2019) Evaluation of sustainable urban mobility using comparative environmental life cycle assessment: A case study of Qatar. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 1, 100003- 100010. Benson, P.E. (1989) CALINE4 - A dispersion model for predicting air pollutant concentrations near roadways. USA: California Department of Transportation. Biggart, M., Stocker, J., Doherty, R. M., Wild, O., Hollaway, M., Carruthers, D., Li, J., Zhang, Q., Wu, R., Kotthaus, S., Grimmond, S., Squires, F.A., Lee, J., Shi, Z. (2020) Street-scale air quality modelling for Beijing during a winter 2016 measurement campaign. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 20 (5), 2755- 2780. Chang, C. -C., Liao, Y. -T., Chang, Y. -W. (2019) Life cycle assessment of alternative energy types – including hydrogen – for public city buses in Taiwan. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 44, 18472- 18482. Chatzinikolaou, S.D., Oikonomou, S.D., Ventikos, N.P. (2015) Health Externalities Of Ship Air Pollution At Port – Piraeus Port Case Study. Transportation Research Part D 40, 155- 165. Curran, M.A. (2013) Life Cycle Assessment Handbook. Massachusetts, USA: Scrivener. Dėdelė, A., Miškinytė, A. (2014) Estimation of Inter-Seasonal Differences in No2 Concentrations Using A Dispersion Adms-Urban Model and Measurements. Air Quality, Atmosphere Health 8, 123- 133. Dhar, S., Pathak, M., Shukla, P. R. (2017) Electric vehicles and India's low carbon passenger transport: a long-term co-benefits assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 146, 139- 148. Earth Tech, Inc. (2000) A user’s Guide for the CALPUFF Dispersion Model. Ercan, T., Tatari, O. (2015) A hybrid life cycle assessment of public transportation buses with alternative fuel options. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 20(9), 1213- 1231. Fernandes, P., Vilaca, M., Macedo, E., Sampaio, C., Bahmankhah, B., Bandeira, J. M., Guarnaccia, C., Rafael, S., Fernandes, A. P., Relvas, H., Borrego, C., Coelho, M. C. (2019) Integrating Road Traffic Externalities Through A Sustainability Indicator. Science of The Total Environment 691, 483- 498. Friedrich, R., Bickel, P. (2001) Environmental External Costs Of Transport. USA: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York. G20 Transport Task Group (2019) Meeting of the G20 Transport Task Group Outcome Report. Hainoun, A., Almoustafa, A., Seif Aldin, M.(2010) Estimating the health damage costs of Syrian electricity generation system using impact pathway approach. Energy 35, 628- 638. Hanlin, J., Reddaway, D., Lane, J. (2018) Battery Electric Buses State of the Practice. Hanlin, J., Reddaway, D., Lane, J. (2018) Battery Electric Buses— State of the Practice: A Synthesis of Transit Practice. Hellweg, S., Canals, L.M.i. Canals (2015) Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in LCA. Science 344(6188), 1109- 1113. Holnicki, P., Kałuszko, A., Trapp, W. (2016) An urban scale application and validation of the CALPUFF model. Atmospheric Pollution Research 7, 393- 402. IEA (2012) World Energy Outlook 2012. International Energy Agency, OECD / IEA, Paris, France. IEA (2013) Policy Pathways: A Tale of Renewed Cities. International Energy Agency, Paris. IEA (2019) Global EV Outlook 2019. IPCC (2014) AR5 climate change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework. ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines. Jorli, M., Van Passel, S., Sadeghi, H., Nasseri, A., Agheli, L. (2017) Estimating Human Health Impacts and Costs Due to Iranian Fossil Fuel Power Plant Emissions through the Impact Pathway Approach. Energies. 10(12), 2136- 2164. Lai, H., Ma, H.-W., Chen, C.-R., Hsiao, M. -C., Pan, B.-H. (2019) Design and application of a hybrid assessment of air quality models for the source apportionment of PM2.5. Atmospheric Environment 212, 116- 127. Lajunen, A., Lipman, T. (2016) Lifecycle Cost Assessment and Carbon Dioxide Emissions of Diesel, Natural Gas, Hybrid Electric, Fuel Cell Hybrid and Electric Transit Buses. Energy 106, 329- 342. Lucas, P. L., Shukla, P. R., Chen, W., van Ruijven, B. J. Dhar, S., den Elzen, M. G. J., van Vuuren, D. P. (2013) Implications of the international reduction pledges on long-term energy system changes and costs in China and India. Energy Policy (63) 1032- 1041. Lyng, K. -A., Brekke, A. (2019) Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Biogas as a Fuel for Transport Compared with Alternative Fuels. Energies 12(3), 532- 543. Nordelöf, A., Romare, M., Tivander, J. (2019) Life cycle assessment of city buses powered by electricity, hydrogenated vegetable oil or diesel. Transportation Research Part D 75, 211-222. OECD (2019) Taxing Vehicles, Fuels, And Road Use: Opportunities For Improving Transport Tax Practice. Patton, A. P., Milando, C., Durant, J. L., Kumar, P. (2017) Assessing the Suitability of Multiple Dispersion and Land Use Regression Models for Urban Traffic-Related Ultrafine Particles. Environmental Science Technology 51(1), 384- 392. Rood, A.S. (2014) Performance evaluation of AERMOD, CALPUFF, and legacy air dispersion models using the Winter Validation Tracer Study dataset. Atmospheric Environment 89, 707- 720. Rzeszutek, M., Szulecka, A., Oleniacz, R., Bogacki, M. (2017) International Conference on Advances in Energy Systems and Environmental Engineering (ASEE17) (Vol. 22). Silveira, C., Roebeling, P., Lopes, M., Ferreira, J., Costa, S., Teixeira, J. P., Borrego, C., Miranda, A. I. (2016) Assessment of health benefits related to air quality improvement strategies in urban areas: An Impact Pathway Approach. Journal of Environmental Management 183, 694- 702. Song, Q., Wang, Z., Wu, Y., Li, J., Yu, D., Duan, H., Yuan, W. (2018) Could Urban Electric Public Bus Really Reduce The GHG Emissions: A Case Study in Macau? Journal of Cleaner Production 172, 2133- 2142. Stokes, C.L., Breetz, H., (2018) Politics in The U.S. Energy Transition: Case Studies of Solar, Wind, Biofuels and Electric Vehicles Policy. Energy Policy 113, 76- 86. Texas A M Transportation Institute. (2016) Alternative Fuel Vehicle Forecasts. Tong, F., Hendrickson, C., Biehler, A., Jaramillo, P., Seki, S. (2017) Life Cycle Ownership Cost And Environmental Externality of Alternative Fuel Options For Transit Buses. Transportation Research Part D 57, 287- 302. UITP (2017) ZeEUS eBus Report: An updated overview of Electric Buses in Europe. UN (2018) The World’s Cities in 2018. USEPA (1995) User's Guide For The Industrial Source Complex (Isc3) Dispersion Models. USEPA (2019a) CMAQv5.3 User’s Manual. USEPA (2019b) User's Guide for the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD). USEPA (2019d) AERMOD model Formulation and Evaluation. USEPA(2019c)User's Guide for the AERMOD Meteorological Preprocessor (AERMET). International Council on Clean Transportation (2020) The end of the road? An overview of combustion-engine car phase-out announcements across Europe. World Resources Institute (2019) Cost and Emissions Appraisal Tool for Transit Buses. Available: https://www.wri.org/publication/transit-buses-tool. 交通部(2019a),「公路公共運輸補助電動大客車作業要點」。交通部交路字第 10850110841號令修正,發布全文11 點,中華民國108年8月29日。 行政院交通部 (2019b),「 2020交通科技產業政策白皮書草案」。 行政院環境保護署 (2019),「臺灣空氣污染排放量[TEDS10.0] 線源─排放量推估手冊」。 吳念祺與陳彥豪 (2011),「電動車成本結構分析及對傳統汽車產業之影響」,臺灣低碳永續發展與前瞻科技策略分析,第34卷,第11期,75- 82。 邱煜勝 (2011),「混合車流污染排放與擴散模式之建構」,碩士論文,國立交通大學交通運輸研究所。 郭瑜堅 (2007),「旅次總成本導向之都市運輸政策評估方法」,博士論文,國立臺灣大學工學院土木工程學研究所。 陳鶴文 (2017),「環境評估—系統原理與應用」。臺北:五南圖書出版有限公司。 楊多興、楊木水、趙曉宏、劉敏、刑可佳、仇蕾 (2005)「AERMOD模式系統理論」,化學工業與工程,第22卷,第2期,130- 135。 經濟部能源局 (2018a),「能源部門溫室氣體排放管制行動方案」。 經濟部能源局 (2018b),「能源轉型白皮書」。 廖孟儀、馬鴻文、李孟穎、洪明龍、李沛濠 (2016),「臺灣火力發電健康衝擊外部成本分析」,臺灣能源期刊,第3卷,第3期,277- 292。 臺北市交通局 (2019),臺北市聯營公共汽車行車效率。 臺北市政府法務局 (2018),「臺北市電動公車營運里程補貼作業原則」。北市運綜字第10732172700號令訂定,發布文七點,並自107年6月30日起生效。 臺灣電力公司 (2020),再生能源發購電量。 臺灣電力公司 (2020),發購電量分七類。 駱尚廉與蕭代基 (2007),「環境經濟分析」。臺北:曉園出版社。 曠永銓、許珮蒨 (2005) 「AERMOD煙流模式在臺灣地區之應用研究」,中興工程季刊,第88期,55- 62。 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/67328 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 運輸為人類生活不可或缺之因素,但是隨著都市化與人口數增加,連帶提高運具數與旅次數,導致環境外部性益發嚴重,故近年來紛紛興起採用替代燃料運具的趨勢;其中又因電動運具發展較成熟,以及具有零尾氣排放等特性,受到廣泛推廣與採用。然而,目前促進電動運具發展與應用仍面臨許多困難,最主要的阻礙之一為高昂的成本。有鑑於此,國際間常見由政府透過政策或經濟工具減輕消費者負擔、鼓勵採用電動運具;而我國行政院亦於2017年宣布於2030年以前達到全面電動化客運公車之目標,且中央與地方政府皆有規劃相關補助措施。 為完整了解運具電動化對決策者與客運業者的影響,進一步評估其環境共效益,本研究建立一評估運具電動化於空氣污染排放與溫室氣體排放減量之方法,以臺北市公車作為研究案例,並設定不同情境探討汰換比例與發電結構對公車的空氣污染排放、溫室氣體排放產生的影響。本研究透過衝擊路徑法,評估公車排放之空氣污染物:NOx、SOx、PM2.5與PM10對人體健康產生之衝擊成本,並結合生命週期評估方法,評估柴油公車與電動公車從製造至營運階段產生之溫室氣體排放,最後經由碳價量化作為其因應全球暖化所需付出之成本。 研究結果顯示,電動公車確能降低空氣污染及溫室氣體所致的風險,然而即使分別在政府給予補助與計入環境共效益的情形下,對客運業者與政府而言,採用電動公車仍面臨初期投入成本較高的情況;以環境共效益與補助款計算此政策對政府之益本比,於各情境約介於4.22%-18.74%之間,雖隨著公車汰換比例越高,益本比亦隨之提高,但總補助額高昂,考量柴油車輛所造成的環境外部性與國際趨勢,建議進一步考量整體政策規劃中對補助業者購置電動公車預算之分配或搭配其他獎勵措施。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Transport plays a key role in human society, but it also brings enormous externalities while population keeps growing. To mitigate the impacts, there is a trend of alternative fuel vehicles adoption in recent years. Electric vehicles(EVs) are the most popular among all the alternatives because of its relatively mature technology and zero tailpipe emissions. However, there remains some barriers facing EVs adoption, one of the major barriers is the cost to consumers. In order to enhance the adoption, Governments often provides policy incentives for manufactures or consumers. To understand the impacts of vehicle electrification to the cost of policies makers and consumers, it is necessary to evaluate the environmental co-benefits of EVs. Therefore, the goal of this study is to integrate the Impact Pathway Approach and Life Cycle Analysis in order to evaluate the monetary valuation of air pollution reduction and greenhouse gas reduction with EVs as a substitution for traditional fossil fuel vehicles. This study, based on the case study of city buses in Taipei City, showed that the substitution had the potential to reduce the costs of health risk and global warming up to 2,122,893,672 NTD and the benefit-cost ratios to the government are between 16.08% to 21.37% in all scenarios. Even though higher electric bus adoption rate leads higher benefit-cost ratio to the government, the capital expenditure raises concern. In the other hands, the incentives are still necessary for bus operators because the environment co-benefits are not direct revenue to them. In conclusion, electric buses can reduce air pollutants and greenhouse gases, but policy makers needs to perform an early and thorough analysis before the large-scale adoption. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T01:28:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-1608202011551500.pdf: 5383074 bytes, checksum: bf41359b54e3a3e19f8a3623cf439a52 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2020 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 摘要 I Abstract II 表目錄 V 圖目錄 VI 第一章、 緒論 1 1.1 研究緣起與目的 1 1.2 研究架構 4 第二章、 文獻回顧 5 2.1 運輸與環境 5 2.1.1 運輸外部性 5 2.1.2 替代燃料車輛發展概況 6 2.1.3 替代燃料車輛的採用與推行 9 2.2 衝擊路徑法 10 2.2.1 衝擊路徑法簡介 10 2.2.2 衝擊路徑法步驟與應用 11 2.3 運輸相關空氣污染擴散模擬 15 2.3.1 空氣品質模式 15 2.4 溫室氣體排放變動評估方法 23 2.4.1 生命週期評估方法簡述 24 2.4.2 生命週期評估應用於評估公車環境衝擊 26 2.4.3 溫室氣體排放減量貨幣化方法 30 第三章、 研究方法 31 3.1 研究流程 31 3.2 研究案例與情境 34 3.3 空氣污染物排放成本評估 36 3.3.1 排放量推估 36 3.3.2 污染物擴散模擬 40 3.3.3 量化衝擊 42 3.3.4 成本貨幣化 45 3.4 生命週期評估 46 3.4.1 目標與範疇界定 46 3.4.2 盤查分析 48 3.4.3 溫室氣體排放成本 53 3.5 綜合效益評估 53 第四章、 結果與討論 57 4.1 空氣污染減量效益評估結果 57 4.2 溫室氣體減量效益評估結果 64 4.3 綜合討論 69 第五章、 結論與建議 72 5.1 結論 72 5.2 建議 73 參考文獻 75 附錄 81 附錄一、AERMOD 執行碼 81 附錄二、生命週期盤查清單 82 附錄三、各程序溫室氣體排放量方向與貢獻示意圖 88 附錄四、PTX平台臺北市公車路線資料介接與班次計算程式碼 95 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 高空間解析度評估運具電動化之環境共效益方法——以臺北市公車為例 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Evaluate the environmental co-benefits of vehicle electrification with high spatial resolution: A case study of city buses in Taipei City | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 108-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 龍世俊(Shih-Chun Candice Lung),曠永銓(Yung-Chuan Kuang) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 電動運具,衝擊路徑法,空氣污染,健康風險,溫室氣體排放, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Electric vehicles,impact pathway approach,air pollution,health risk,greenhouse gas emission, | en |
dc.relation.page | 95 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202003570 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2020-08-17 | |
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 | |
---|---|---|---|
U0001-1608202011551500.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 5.26 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。