請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/72389
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 闕蓓德 | |
dc.contributor.author | Zih-Shian Liao | en |
dc.contributor.author | 廖子賢 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T06:39:28Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-08-21 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2018-08-21 | |
dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2018-08-15 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Alliance, F.W.R. (2014) Analysis of US food waste among food manufacturers, retailers, and restaurants. Food Waste Reduction Alliance, USA.
Angelo, A.C.M., Saraiva, A.B., Clímaco, J.C.N., Infante, C.E. and Valle, R. (2017) Life Cycle Assessment and Multi-criteria Decision Analysis: Selection of a strategy for domestic food waste management in Rio de Janeiro. Journal of Cleaner Production 143, 744-756. APEC(2017) the APEC Information Platform on Post Harvest Loss and Waste System http://apipphlows.wix.com/apec-apip-phlows Bagherzadeh, M., Inamura, M. and Jeong, H. (2014) Food waste along the food chain. Buzby, J., Farah-Wells, H. and Hyman, J. (2014) The estimated amount, value, and calories of postharvest food losses at the retail and consumer levels in the United States. Cristóbal, J., Castellani, V., Manfredi, S. and Sala, S. (2018) Prioritizing and optimizing sustainable measures for food waste prevention and management. Waste Management 72, 3-16. De Clercq, D., Wen, Z. and Fan, F. (2017) Performance evaluation of restaurant food waste and biowaste to biogas pilot projects in China and implications for national policy. Journal of environmental management 189, 115-124. Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs (2014) Preventing Food Waste and Optimising Residual Waste Streams, Agriculture and Innovation, Nederland. EC (1989) A Community strategy for waste management, EC (2008) Directive 2008/98/EC of the european parliament and of the council of 19 november 2008 on waste and repealing certain directives (waste framework directive). LexUriServ. do. Ekins, P. (2009) Sustainable Growth and Resource Productivity: Economic and Global Policy Issues, Greenleaf Publishing. Eriksson, M. and Spångberg, J. (2017) Carbon footprint and energy use of food waste management options for fresh fruit and vegetables from supermarkets. Waste Management 60, 786-799. Eriksson, M., Strid, I. and Hansson, P.-A. (2015) Carbon footprint of food waste management options in the waste hierarchy–a Swedish case study. Journal of Cleaner Production 93, 115-125. FAO (2011) Global food losses and food waste – Extent, causes and prevention, Rome. FAO (2012) The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2012, Economic Growth Is Necessary but Not Sufficient to Accelerate Reduction of Hunger and Malnutrition, Rome. FAO (2013) Food Wastage Footprint: Impacts on Natural Resources, Rome. FAO (2015) Global Initiative on Food Loss and Waste Reduction, Rome. FEEDBACK(2014) Feeding the 5000. http://www.feeding5k.org/businesses.php Franchetti, M. (2013) Economic and environmental analysis of four different configurations of anaerobic digestion for food waste to energy conversion using LCA for: a food service provider case study. Journal of environmental management 123, 42-48. GAMS(2018) An Introduction to GAMS. https://www.gams.com/products/introduction/ Group, C.O.o.A.T.T.W.A., Stoddard, S.K., Davis, G.A., Freeman, H.M. and Deibler, P.M. (1981) Alternatives to the Land Disposal of Hazardous Wastes: An Assessment for California, State of California [Office of Appropriate Technology]. Hultman, J. and Corvellec, H. (2012) The European waste hierarchy: From the sociomateriality of waste to a politics of consumption. Environment and Planning A 44(10), 2413-2427. ISO, I. (2006) 14040: Environmental management–life cycle assessment–principles and framework. London: British Standards Institution. Khoo, H.H., Lim, T.Z. and Tan, R.B. (2010) Food waste conversion options in Singapore: environmental impacts based on an LCA perspective. Science of the total environment 408(6), 1367-1373. Kim, M.-H. and Kim, J.-W. (2010) Comparison through a LCA evaluation analysis of food waste disposal options from the perspective of global warming and resource recovery. Science of the total environment 408(19), 3998-4006. Liu, C., Hotta, Y., Santo, A., Hengesbaugh, M., Watabe, A., Totoki, Y., Allen, D. and Bengtsson, M. (2016) Food waste in Japan: Trends, current practices and key challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production 133, 557-564. Mourad, M. (2016) Recycling, recovering and preventing “food waste”: competing solutions for food systems sustainability in the United States and France. Journal of Cleaner Production 126, 461-477. Notarnicola, B., Tassielli, G., Renzulli, P.A., Castellani, V. and Sala, S. (2017) Environmental impacts of food consumption in Europe. Journal of Cleaner Production 140, 753-765. NRDC (2013) The Dating Game:How Confusing Labels Land Billions of Pounds of Food in the Trash. NSF(2015) Modeling the Nation’s Food System. https://mathinstitutes.org/highlights/modeling-the-nations-food-system/ Organization, I.S. (2006) Environmental Management: Life Cycle Assessments: Requirements and Guidelines, ISO. Parfitt, J., Barthel, M. and Macnaughton, S. (2010) Food waste within food supply chains: quantification and potential for change to 2050. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 365(1554), 3065-3081. Parto, S., Loorbach, D., Lansink, A. and Kemp, R. (2007) 9. Transitions and Institutional Change: The Case of the Dutch Waste Subsystem. Pennington, D., Potting, J., Finnveden, G., Lindeijer, E., Jolliet, O., Rydberg, T. and Rebitzer, G. (2004) Life cycle assessment Part 2: Current impact assessment practice. Environment international 30(5), 721-739. ReFed (2016) A Roadmap to Reduce US Food Waste by 20%, United States. Salemdeeb, R., Vivanco, D.F., Al-Tabbaa, A. and zu Ermgassen, E.K. (2017a) A holistic approach to the environmental evaluation of food waste prevention. Waste Management 59, 442-450. Salemdeeb, R., zu Ermgassen, E.K., Kim, M.H., Balmford, A. and Al-Tabbaa, A. (2017b) Environmental and health impacts of using food waste as animal feed: a comparative analysis of food waste management options. Journal of Cleaner Production 140, 871-880. Thyberg, K.L. and Tonjes, D.J. (2017) The environmental impacts of alternative food waste treatment technologies in the US. Journal of Cleaner Production 158, 101-108. Tong, H., Shen, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, C.-H., Ge, T.S. and Tong, Y.W. (2018) A comparative life cycle assessment on four waste-to-energy scenarios for food waste generated in eateries. Applied Energy 225, 1143-1157. USEPA(2014) http://www.epa.gov/foodrecoverychallenge/ Van Ewijk, S. and Stegemann, J. (2016) Limitations of the waste hierarchy for achieving absolute reductions in material throughput. Journal of Cleaner Production 132, 122-128. Williams, H., Wikström, F., Otterbring, T., Löfgren, M. and Gustafsson, A. (2012) Reasons for household food waste with special attention to packaging. Journal of Cleaner Production 24, 141-148. Winkler, T., Schopf, K., Aschemann, R. and Winiwarter, W. (2016) From farm to fork–A life cycle assessment of fresh Austrian pork. Journal of Cleaner Production 116, 80-89. Wolf, K. (1988) Source reduction and the waste management hierarchy. JAPCA 38(5), 681-686. 洪慧娟,豬隻生命週期之碳足跡及水足跡評估-案例分析,逢甲大學環境工程與科學學系,2013。 袁光宇,應用氣候變遷情境探討糧食、能源與水鏈結之最佳化:以殘餘生質物產製生質能源為例,國立臺灣大學環境工程學研究所,2017。 曾偉倫,臺北市都市生質廢棄物之都市代謝研究,國立臺灣大學環境工程學研究所,2015。 陳寶玲,臺灣地區剩食處理方式之策略規劃,國立臺灣大學環境工程學研究所,2017。 唐維,鮮乳產品碳足跡的計算及改善策略之研究,國立臺灣大學獸醫學研究所,2012。 詹才武,前處理對污泥厭氧產氣之影響,國立臺灣大學化學工程研究所,2006。 蔣在文,區域性水資源耗用之生命週期衝擊評估,國立臺灣大學環境工程學研究所,2012。 鍾明修,臺灣農產品環境衝擊與碳足跡之評估研究,國立臺北科技大學環境工程與管理研究所,2013。 工業技術研究院,Taiwan 2050 Calculator 能源供給部門情境規劃與關鍵參數說明,2013。 行政院環境保護署,廚餘養豬再利用,2014。https://www.epa.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=9130&ctNode=31520&mp=epa 行政院環境保護署,102至104年度一般廢棄物最終處置前組成採樣及分析工作委託專案計畫,2015。 行政院農業委員會,糧食平衡表,2018。http://agrstat.coa.gov.tw/sdweb/public/inquiry/InquireAdvance.aspx | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/72389 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 聯合國糧農組織於2011年的報告中指出,人類每年扔掉的食物約佔了糧食總產量的三分之一。食物廢棄物對於環境更是有著巨大且不容忽視的影響,食物廢棄物之管理也顯得格外的重要。而各地區食物供應鏈上各階段產生食物廢棄物的型態依照各地條件而有差異,因此在研究地區性之食物廢棄物管理時,需特別注意各地間食物供應鏈特性之差異。目前許多研究都以食物廢棄物分層等級作為出發點以評估食物廢棄物管理之決策,亦應用生命週期評估分析方法至此議題上,但大多聚焦在食物廢棄物下游處置上,用以評估及決策的方法仍是相當的有限。本研究以臺灣為主要研究地區,以生命週期評估分析臺灣食物供應鏈各階段之環境衝擊,並同時利用線性規劃法,結合環境因子及經濟因子,建立了兩組臺灣食物廢棄物永續管理最佳化模式,分析如何以預防、重複利用及回收再利用共三大類16項管理方案配置處理食物廢棄物以達到最大環境效益,以建立更符合在地化情況之食物廢棄物管理決策輔助工具。
結果顯示在臺灣,榖類、肉類及蔬果類食物皆以生產階段為衝擊熱點,乳類之衝擊熱點為加工階段,並且皆以氣候變遷之人體健康、化石燃料耗用及粒狀污染物形成為佔總衝擊中最多比例之三類衝擊類別。最終處置方式部分,總環境衝擊最大者為集中堆肥,次者為厭氧共消化,接著是動物飼料及焚化,其衝擊結果受是否考量能資源回收之替代效益影響甚大。於最佳化結果顯示,消費者教育活動、統一日期標示、產品規格改變、改善存貨管理、冷鏈管理、標準化捐贈規範及捐贈義務教育皆兼具環境效益及經濟有效性。而捐贈租稅誘因、標準化捐贈規範、捐贈運輸設施、加值處理及捐贈義務教育中應用於消費階段時所能產生之環境效益為負值,意即以這些方案處理消費階段產生之剩食的環境衝擊大於將這些剩食進行焚化處理之環境衝擊,較不具環境優勢,捐贈倉儲與管理以及集中堆肥處理則為在模擬結果中最不具環境效益之管理方案。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has estimated that about 30% of the food produced for human was lost or wasted along the food supply chain. Food waste is increasingly acknowledged as an urgent issue globally with not only a social cost but also negative consequences on the environment and natural resources. Therefore, comprehensive analysis of food waste managements is expected to make a significant contribution to achieve sustainable development goals. The characteristics of food waste along the food supply chain varies tremendously from place to place, taking the differences into account for the decision making of food waste managements is rather necessary. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is an applied approach for evaluating environment impacts over the whole life cycle of a product, process, and activities. LCA is widely used as an assessing method in supporting systems for quantifying the environmental impacts for waste managements. The waste hierarchy h prioritize waste management measures by their environmental preferences and has recently been applied to the management of food waste.
Up till now, studies for food waste management has been focusing on assessing the disposal or recovery methods of the food waste produced in the consumption stage, regardless of the prevention methods, reusing methods, and the food waste produced in other stages in food supply chain. Also, there was limited knowledge on the evaluation of food waste management strategies including both economic and environmental aspects. This study aimed at establishing two linear programing models for the optimization of food waste management. By considering both environmental and economic indicators, the approach developed in this study identified the optimal combination of food waste management options in order to maximize the environmental benefits along the food supply chain in Taiwan within certain budget. LCA results showed that the hotspots for environmental impacts of food supply chains in Taiwan was production stage for grain, meat, fruits and vegetable, and process stage for milk. On the other hand, the optimization result showed that, among all options, donation storage and handling and centralized composting were the least favorable food waste management measures in Taiwan, which indicated that these two options would be excluded at the planning stage of the food waste management in the case study area. With more comprehensive consideration of the life cycle of each type of food waste, and also more localized life cycle inventory data, a more authentic LCA approach was established along with the optimization modeling established to identify the optimal combination of each treatment quantity, thereby creating a more effective decision support tool in food waste management. This study seeks to enhance the authenticity and reliably of existing food waste management analysis by improving the data inventory of LCA, the omitted impacts from upstream stages of food wastes and also the optimization modeling into actual amount treatment quantity, which can further be utilized by stakeholders to be more initiative faced with multiple management options. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T06:39:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-107-R05541210-1.pdf: 2581707 bytes, checksum: 8af6d2a1bca5adf9543363d556efccdd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 目錄 iv
圖目錄 vi 第一章 緒論 3 1.1研究緣起 3 1.2研究目的 4 1.3研究流程與論文 4 第二章 文獻回顧 7 2.1食物供應鏈與食物廢棄物 7 2.1.1 食物供應鏈 7 2.1.2 食物供應鏈上的食物廢棄物 9 2.2食物廢棄物之全球環境影響 12 2.3食物廢棄物的生命週期評估及決策回顧 15 2.3.1 生命週期評估方法介紹 15 2.3.2食物廢棄物之生命週期評估及決策 18 2.4食物廢棄物分層等級 20 2.4.1廢棄物分層等級 20 2.4.2 食物廢棄物分層等級 21 2.5臺灣廚餘量與回收再利用現況 23 2.5.1臺灣廚餘量現況 23 2.5.2臺灣廚餘再利用方式介紹 25 第三章 研究方法 27 3.1研究流程 27 3.2食物供應鏈環境衝擊評估 28 3.2.1目標與範疇界定 28 3.2.2盤查清單 29 3.3最佳化模式建立 37 3.3.1食物廢棄物量之定量 38 3.3.2食物廢棄物管理方案選擇及處理量設定 39 3.3.3環境效益之計算 50 3.3.4經濟成本之計算 53 3.3.5線性規劃模式建立與求解 54 第四章 結果與討論 58 4.1臺灣產食物生命週期之生命週期評估結果 58 4.1.1食物供應鏈生命週期評估結果之比較 58 4.1.2最終處置與替代最終處置生命週期評估結果之比較 63 4.2最佳化模式結果 72 4.2.1 MODEL1模式最佳化結果 72 4.2.2 MODEL2模式最佳化結果 81 4.2.3 MODEL1及MODEL2模式之敏感度分析 86 4.2.4 MODEL1及MODEL2模式之比較 88 第五章 結論與建議 84 5.1結論 84 5.2建議 86 第六章 參考文獻 88 附錄 92 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 食物廢棄物之永續管理最佳化分析—以臺灣為例 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Sustainable Optimization Analysis of Food Waste Management: A Case Study in Taiwan | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 106-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 胡明哲,李孟珊 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 生命週期評估,食物供應鏈,廢棄物管理,最佳化分析, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Life cycle assessment,Food waste management,Food supply chain,Optimization modeling, | en |
dc.relation.page | 100 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201803734 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2018-08-16 | |
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-107-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.52 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。