請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/737
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 馬鴻文(Hwong-Wen Ma) | |
dc.contributor.author | Kuo-Lun Feng | en |
dc.contributor.author | 馮國倫 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-11T05:00:19Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2019-07-26 | |
dc.date.available | 2021-05-11T05:00:19Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2019-07-26 | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2019-07-25 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1. Al-Ansari, T., Korre, A., Nie, Z., & Shah, N. (2015). Development of a life cycle assessment tool for the assessment of food production systems within the energy, water and food nexus. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2, 52-66.
2. Albrecht, T. R., Crootof, A., & Scott, C. A. (2018). The Water-Energy-Food Nexus: A systematic review of methods for nexus assessment. Environmental Research Letters, 13(4), 043002. 3. Allan, J. A. (2003). Virtual water-the water, food, and trade nexus. Useful concept or misleading metaphor?. Water international, 28(1), 106-113. 4. Asian Development Bank (ADB). (2013). Thinking about water differently: managing the Water–Food–Energy Nexus. Mandaluyong Cit (Philippines): Asian Development Bank. 5. Atlantic Council. (2011). Energy for Water and Water for Energy: a Report on the Atlantic Council's Workshop How the Nexus Impacts Electric Power Production in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/publications/reports/energy-for-water-and-water-for-energy 6. Biggs, E. M., Bruce, E., Boruff, B., Duncan, J. M., Horsley, J., Pauli, N., ... & Haworth, B. (2015). Sustainable development and the water–energy–food nexus: A perspective on livelihoods. Environmental Science & Policy, 54, 389-397. 7. Bizikova, L., Roy, D., Swanson, D., Venema, H. D., & McCandless, M. (2013). The water-energy-food security nexus: Towards a practical planning and decision-support framework for landscape investment and risk management. Winnipeg, Manitoba: International Institute for Sustainable Development. 8. Brandoni, C., & Bošnjaković, B. (2017). HOMER analysis of the water and renewable energy nexus for water-stressed urban areas in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Cleaner Production, 155, 105-118. 9. Brentrup, F., & Pallière, C. (2008). GHG emissions and energy efficiency in European nitrogen fertiliser production and use. In Proceedings-International Fertiliser Society (No. 639, pp. 1-25). International Fertiliser Society. 10. Brunner P. H. & Rechberger H. (2004). Practical handbook of material flow analysis. FL, USA: Lewis Publishers 11. Chang, Y., Li, G., Yao, Y., Zhang, L., & Yu, C. (2016). Quantifying the water-energy-food nexus: current status and trends. Energies, 9(2), 65. 12. Chen, S., & Chen, B. (2017). Coupling of carbon and energy flows in cities: A meta-analysis and nexus modelling. Applied energy, 194, 774-783. 13. Chester, M., Pincetl, S., & Allenby, B. (2012). Avoiding unintended tradeoffs by integrating life-cycle impact assessment with urban metabolism. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4(4), 451-457. 14. Davies, E. G., Kyle, P., & Edmonds, J. A. (2013). An integrated assessment of global and regional water demands for electricity generation to 2095. Advances in Water Resources, 52, 296-313. 15. De Laurentiis, V., Hunt, D. V., & Rogers, C. D. (2016). Overcoming food security challenges within an energy/water/food nexus approach. Sustainability, 8(1), 95. 16. Engström, R. E., Howells, M., Destouni, G., Bhatt, V., Bazilian, M., & Rogner, H. H. (2017). Connecting the resource nexus to basic urban service provision–with a focus on water-energy interactions in New York City. Sustainable cities and society, 31, 83-94. 17. Ericksen, P. J. (2008). Conceptualizing food systems for global environmental change research. Global environmental change, 18(1), 234-245. 18. FAO (2009). Growing more food, using less water. Retrieved from www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/newsroom/docs/water_facts.pdf 19. Fang, D., & Chen, B. (2017). Linkage analysis for the water–energy nexus of city. Applied energy, 189, 770-779. 20. Fasel, M., Brethaut, C., Rouholahnejad, E., Lacayo-Emery, M. A., & Lehmann, A. (2016). Blue water scarcity in the Black Sea catchment: Identifying key actors in the water-ecosystem-energy-food nexus. Environmental Science & Policy, 66, 140-150. 21. Feng, K., Hubacek, K., Siu, Y. L., & Li, X. (2014). The energy and water nexus in Chinese electricity production: a hybrid life cycle analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39, 342-355. 22. Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M. Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S., ... & Suh, S. (2009). Recent developments in life cycle assessment. Journal of environmental management, 91(1), 1-21. 23. Fischer-Kowalski, M. & Swilling, M. (2011). Decoupling Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth. Paris: United Nations Environment Programme. 24. Fthenakis, V., & Kim, H. C. (2010). Life-cycle uses of water in US electricity generation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(7), 2039-2048. 25. Gabarrell, X., Saavedra, Y. M., Silva, D. A. L., Dias, A. C., Rieradevall, J., Ometto, A. R., & Villalba, G. (2014). MFA+ LCA applied to industrial parks. SETAC Europe 24th Annual Meeting. Basel, Switzerland. 26. Gabarrell X, Amat E, Solà Oliver J, Gasol CM, Rieradevall J. (2010). The effects of using different mixes of energy sources in the generation of electricity in Europe – Book:can we break the addiction to fossil energy? In: Proceedings of the 7th BiennialInternational Workshop Advances in Energy Studies. 27. Goedkoop M.J., R. Heijungs, M. Huijbregts, A. De Schryver; J. Struijs, and R. Van Zelm. (2009). ReCiPe 2008 [First edition]. Retrieved from https://www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/ssp/publications/recipe_characterisation_addenum.pdf 28. Goldstein, B., Birkved, M., Quitzau, M. B., & Hauschild, M. (2013). Quantification of urban metabolism through coupling with the life cycle assessment framework: concept development and case study. Environmental Research Letters, 8(3), 035024. 29. Gondhalekar, D., & Ramsauer, T. (2017). Nexus City: operationalizing the urban water-energy-food nexus for climate change adaptation in Munich, Germany. Urban Climate, 19, 28-40. 30. Guinée, J., R. Heijungs, G.Huppes, A. Zamagni, P. Masoni, R. Buonamici, T. Ekvall and T. Rydberg. (2011). Life Cycle Assessment: Past, Present, and Future. Environmental Science and Technology, 45(1), 90-96. 31. Hellweg, S., & i Canals, L. M. (2014). Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in life cycle assessment. Science, 344(6188), 1109-1113. 32. Holland, R. A., Scott, K. A., Flörke, M., Brown, G., Ewers, R. M., Farmer, E., ... & Barrett, J. (2015). Global impacts of energy demand on the freshwater resources of nations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(48), E6707-E6716. 33. Hoff, H. (2011). Understanding the Nexus. Background Paper for the Bonn2011Conference: The Water, Energy and Food Security Nexus. Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm. 34. Hussey, K., & Pittock, J. (2012). The energy–water nexus: Managing the links between energy and water for a sustainable future. Ecology and Society, 17(1). 35. Huang, C. L., Vause, J., Ma, H. W., & Yu, C. P. (2012). Using material/substance flow analysis to support sustainable development assessment: a literature review and outlook. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 68, 104-116. 36. ILCD (International Reference Life Cycle Data System). (2010). General guide for Life Cycle Assessment-Detailed guidance. Luxembourg. doi, 10(38479), 0. 37. Irabien, A., & Darton, R. C. (2016). Energy–water–food nexus in the Spanish greenhouse tomato production. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 18(5), 1307-1316. 38. International Energy Agency (IEA). (2012). World energy outlook 2012. Paris: International Energy Agency. 39. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2006). The New International Standards for Life Cycle Assessment: ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1065/lca2006.02.002 40. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: IPCC. 41. IRENA. (2015). Renewable Energy in the Water, Energy & Food Nexus. Retrieved from http://www.irena.org/documentdownloads/publications/irena_water_energy_food_nexus_2015.pdf. 42. Jeswani, H. K., Burkinshaw, R., & Azapagic, A. (2015). Environmental sustainability issues in the food–energy–water nexus: Breakfast cereals and snacks. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2, 17-28. 43. Keskinen, M., Guillaume, J. H., Kattelus, M., Porkka, M., Räsänen, T. A., & Varis, O. (2016). The water-energy-food nexus and the transboundary context: insights from large Asian rivers. Water, 8(5), 193. 44. Lassen, C., Hansen, E., COWI, C. E., & Planners, A. S. (2000). Paradigm for substance flow analyses. Guide for SFAs carried out for the Danish EPA. Environmental Project, (577). 45. Li, X., Feng, K., Siu, Y. L., & Hubacek, K. (2012). Energy-water nexus of wind power in China: the balancing act between CO2 emissions and water consumption. Energy policy, 45, 440-448. 46. Li, H., & Kwan, M. P. (2018). Advancing analytical methods for urban metabolism studies. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 132, 239-245. 47. Lofman, D., Petersen, M., & Bower, A. (2002). Water, energy and environment nexus: The California experience. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 18(1), 73-85. 48. Lu, Y., & Chen, B. (2016). Energy-water nexus in urban industrial system. Energy Procedia, 88, 212-217. 49. McCalla, A. (1997, May). The water, food, and trade nexus. In Paper delivered at MENA-MED Conference convened by the World Bank in Marrakesh. 50. Ma, L., Allwood, J. M., Cullen, J. M., & Li, Z. (2012). The use of energy in China: Tracing the flow of energy from primary source to demand drivers. Energy, 40(1), 174-188. 51. Malik, R. P. S. (2002). Water-energy nexus in resource-poor economies: the Indian experience. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 18(1), 47-58. 52. Mannan, M., Al-Ansari, T., Mackey, H. R., & Al-Ghamdi, S. G. (2018). Quantifying the energy, water and food nexus: A review of the latest developments based on life-cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 193, 300-314. 53. Meldrum, J., Nettles-Anderson, S., Heath, G., & Macknick, J. (2013). Life cycle water use for electricity generation: a review and harmonization of literature estimates. Environmental Research Letters, 8(1), 015031. 54. OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2008). Measuring material flows and resource productivity. 55. Pacetti, T., Lombardi, L., & Federici, G. (2015). Water–energy Nexus: a case of biogas production from energy crops evaluated by Water Footprint and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 101, 278-291. 56. Perrone, D., Murphy, J., & Hornberger, G. M. (2011). Gaining perspective on the water− energy nexus at the community scale. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(10), 4228-4234 57. Rambo, K. A., Warsinger, D. M., Shanbhogue, S. J., & Ghoniem, A. F. (2017). Water-Energy Nexus in Saudi Arabia. Energy Procedia, 3837-3843. 58. Ramaswami, A., Boyer, D., Nagpure, A. S., Fang, A., Bogra, S., Bakshi, B., ... & Rao-Ghorpade, A. (2017). An urban systems framework to assess the trans-boundary food-energy-water nexus: implementation in Delhi, India. Environmental Research Letters, 12(2), 025008. 59. Silva, D. A. L., de Oliveira, J. A., Saavedra, Y. M., Ometto, A. R., i Pons, J. R., & Durany, X. G. (2015). Combined MFA and LCA approach to evaluate the metabolism of service polygons: A case study on a university campus. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 94, 157-168. 60. Sachs, I., & Silk, D. (1990). Food and energy: strategies for sustainable development. United Nations University Press. 61. Scott, C. A. (2011). The water‐energy‐climate nexus: resources and policy outlook for aquifers in Mexico. Water Resources Research, 47(6). 62. Siddiqi, A., Anadon, L.D. (2011). The water–energy nexus in Middle East and North Africa. Energy Policy, 39(8), 4529–4540. 63. Smajgl, A., Ward, J., & Pluschke, L. (2016). The water–food–energy Nexus–Realising a new paradigm. Journal of Hydrology, 533, 533-540. 64. Sorrell, S., Speirs, J., Bentley, R., Brandt, A. & Miller, R. (2010). Global Oil Depletion: A Review of the Evidence. Energy Policy, 38(9), 5290-5295. 65. SOER. (2010). State of the Environment, Cross-sectoral assessment of the agriculture, energy, forestry and transport sectors, EEA. 66. Tan, C., & Zhi, Q. (2016). The energy-water nexus: a literature review of the dependence of energy on water. Energy Procedia, 88, 277-284. 67. UNEP. (2014). Assessing Global: Balancing Consumption with Sustainable Supply. A Report of the Working Group on Land and Soils of the International Resource Panel. Paris: United Nations Environment Programme. United Nations University Press, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 90. 68. UNDESA (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs). (2009). World Population Prospects, The 2008 Revision – Executive Summary. New York, UNDESA. 69. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). (2017). Environment Baseline Vol. 4: Energy-Water Nexus. Retrieved from ttps://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/01/f34/Environment%20Baseline%20Vol.%204--Energy-Water%20Nexus.pdf 70. The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). (2015). Renewable Energy in The Water, Energy & Food NEXUS. Retrieved from http://www.irena.org/documentdownloads/publications/irena_water_energy_food_nexus_2015.pdf 71. UN-Water. (2015). The United Nations world water development report2015—Water for a sustainable world. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/loginarea/naturalsciences/environment/water/wwap/wwdr/2015-water-for-a-sustainable-world/, Accessed. 72. UN-Water, F. (2007). Coping with water scarcity — challenge of the twenty-first century. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-aq444e.pdf 73. Vanham, D. (2016). Does the water footprint concept provide relevant information to address the water–food–energy–ecosystem nexus?. Ecosystem services, 17, 298-307. 74. Vanham, D., Gawlik, B. M., & Bidoglio, G. (2017). Food consumption and related water resources in Nordic cities. Ecological Indicators, 74, 119-129. 75. Van Ginkel, S. W., Igou, T., & Chen, Y. (2017). Energy, water and nutrient impacts of California-grown vegetables compared to controlled environmental agriculture systems in Atlanta, GA. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 122, 319-325. 76. Walker, R. V., Beck, M. B., Hall, J. W., Dawson, R. J., & Heidrich, O. (2014). The energy-water-food nexus: Strategic analysis of technologies for transforming the urban metabolism. Journal of environmental management, 141, 104-115. 77. Wang, S., & Chen, B. (2016). Energy–water nexus of urban agglomeration based on multiregional input–output tables and ecological network analysis: a case study of the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region. Applied Energy, 178, 773-783. 78. White, D. J., Hubacek, K., Feng, K., Sun, L., & Meng, B. (2018). The Water-Energy-Food Nexus in East Asia: A tele-connected value chain analysis using inter-regional input-output analysis. Applied Energy, 210, 550-567. 79. World Economic Forum (WEF). (2009). Thirsty energy: water and energy in the 21st century. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/reports/thirsty-energy-water-and-energy-21st-century 80. World Economic Forum (WEF). (2014). The Water-Energy Nexus: Strategic considerations for Energy Policy-Makers. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/reports/water-energy-nexus-strategic-considerations-energy-policy-makers 81. WBCSD, 2014.Water, food and energy nexus challenges. Retrieved from http://wbcsdpublications.org/project/water-food-and-energy-nexus-challenges/ 82. World Economic Forum (WEF). (2011). Global Risks 2011 [Sixth Edition]. Retrieved from http://reports.weforum.org/global-risks-2011/ 83. Wakeford, J., Kelly, C., & Mentz Lagrange, S. (2015). Mitigating risks and vulnerabilities in the energy-food-water nexus in developing countries. Stellenbosch. South Africa: Sustainability Institute. 84. Wa'el A, H., Memon, F. A., & Savic, D. A. (2018). A risk-based assessment of the household water-energy-food nexus under the impact of seasonal variability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 171, 1275-1289. 85. Wong, J. L. (2010). The Food-Energy-Water Nexus. Harvard Asia Quarterly, 12. 86. Wolf, M. A., Chomkhamsri, K., Brandao, M., Pant, R., Ardente, F., Pennington, D. W., & Goralczy k, M. (2010). ILCD Handbook-General Guide for Life Cycle Assessment-Detailed Guidance. Retrieved from http://www.citeulike.org/group/13799/article/11823307 87. White, D. J., Hubacek, K., Feng, K., Sun, L., & Meng, B. (2018). The Water-Energy-Food Nexus in East Asia: A tele-connected value chain analysis using inter-regional input-output analysis. Applied Energy, 210, 550-567. 88. Yillia, P. T. (2016). Water-Energy-Food nexus: framing the opportunities, challenges and synergies for implementing the SDGs. Österreichische Wasser-und Abfallwirtschaft, 68(3-4), 86-98. 89. Zhang, Y., Yang, Z., & Yu, X. (2015). Urban metabolism: a review of current knowledge and directions for future study. Environmental science & technology, 49(19), 11247-11263. 90. Ziv, G., Watson, E., Young, D., Howard, D. C., Larcom, S. T., & Tanentzap, A. J. (2018). The potential impact of Brexit on the energy, water and food nexus in the UK: A fuzzy cognitive mapping approach. Applied Energy, 210, 487-498. 91. 中技社(2013)。永續資源管理技術手冊。ISBN:978-986-88170-9-8。 92. 中技社(2016)。糧食、能源、水資源鏈結(FEW Nexus)發展趨勢與應用潛力。ISBN:978-986-94322-0-7。 93. 中技社(2017)。台灣糧食自給率之影響及因應。ISBN:978-986-94322-7-6 94. 中興工程顧問社(2011)。都市污水處理廠放流水再生回收-福田水資源回收中心模廠試驗。取自http://tao.wordpedia.com/pdf_down.aspx?filename=JO00001088_111_61-69 95. 中油(2017)。2017永續報告書。取自https://new.cpc.com.tw/csr/report/ 96. 林暐(2017)。構建水資源、能源與糧食交織系統風險評估方法—以金門地區為例,臺灣大學環境工程學研究所碩士論文。 97. 呂冠霖(2013)。台灣地區稀土元素釹之物質流分析與資源管理,臺灣大學環境工程學研究所碩士論文。 98. 台灣電力公司(2018)。106年長期電源開發方案。取自 https://www.taipower.com.tw/tc/page.aspx?mid=212&cid=122&cchk=260a432c-fc0e-47e0-a90e-2bc0cc52cb61 99. 李秀雯(2012)。以物質流方法探討臺灣含汞物質的管理,臺灣大學環境工程學研究所碩士論文。 100. 行政院主計處(2011)。中華民國行業標準分類。取自https://ebook.dgbas.gov.tw/public/Data/342211223371.pdf 101. 行政院農委會(2013)。糧食平衡表編制方法。取自http://agrstat.coa.gov.tw/sdweb/public/book/Book_File.ashx?chapter_id=323_4_2 102. 周嫦娥(2015)。台灣水資源需求現況與管理策略工具。土木水利,42(4), 19-29。 103. 張廣智(2016)。再生水資源發展條例立法與推動現況。取自http://www.asip.org.tw/userfiles/file/2016/Hsinchu/1050729w1.pdf 104. 楊偉甫(2012)。我國水資源政策。取自http://www.myregie.tw/attachment/3bcb42c1-e074-415a-9b05-985cc7c89201 105. 陳思蓉(2016)。以存匯觀點探討都市危害物質之管理—以台北市鉛物質為例,臺灣大學環境工程學研究所碩士論文。 106. 陳必晟(2014)。以物質流分析強化經濟系統活動之風險評估與管理,臺灣大學環境工程學研究所博士論文。 107. 經濟部(2002)。台灣地區水資源開發綱領計畫政策評估說明書(定稿本)。取自https://www.epa.gov.tw/Page/26CEE2F18D0409B8 108. 經濟部能源局(2010)。能源發展綱領政策評估說明書(草案)。取自http://www.tri.org.tw/energy/Web%20information/2/2-1.pdf 109. 經濟部能源局(2016a)。中華民國105年能源統計手冊。取自https://www.moeaboe.gov.tw/ECW/populace/content/ContentLink.aspx?menu_id=137 110. 經濟部能源局(2016b)。105年能源平衡表編製說明。取自https://www.moeaboe.gov.tw/ECW/populace/web_book/wHandWebReports_File.ashx?type=pdf&book_code=B_CH&chapter_code=E&report_code=01 111. 經濟部水利署(2014)。海水淡化現況。取自https://www.wra.gov.tw/media/18348/f-temp-attachment-532014513583.pdf 112. 經濟部水利署(2016)。105年度經濟部水利署年報。取自https://lib.wra.gov.tw/libebookFlip/2017/2010004041b/mobile/index.html#p=1 113. 經濟部水利署(2013)。新紀元水利施政綱領(102~111年)。取自https://www.wra.gov.tw/media/16538/%E6%96%B0%E7%B4%80%E5%85%83%E6%B0%B4%E5%88%A9%E6%96%BD%E6%94%BF%E7%B6%B1%E9%A0%98-102-111%E5%B9%B4.odt 114. 經濟部工業局(2010)。鋼鐵工業政策評估說明書。取自https://www.mirdc.org.tw/FileDownLoad/News/20104915451218.pdf 115. 趙家緯(2013)。型塑公共政策生態理性—整合性環境評估模型之發展與應用,國立台灣大學環境工程學研究所博士論文。 116. 林鼎傑(2010)。應用空間特殊性生命週期評估於台灣 PVC 供應鏈之環境衝擊與環境債分析,國立台灣大學環境工程學研究所碩士論文 117. 黃建中(2005)。生命週期衝擊評估之客觀權重方法,國立台灣大學環境工程學研究所博士論文。 118. 范景雯(2012)。以投入產出生命週期評估探討台灣自來水供水系統之碳足跡,臺北科技大學環境工程與管理研究所學位論文。 119. 蘇宏仁(2009)。台灣地區砷之物質流分析,臺灣大學環境工程學研究所碩士論文。 120. 歐陽嶠暉(2014)。台灣水環境資源品質變遷與展望。取自http://www.yucc.org.tw/news/column/53f070636c3474b058838cc76e9054c18cea8b8a907782075c55671b | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/737 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 隨水、能源、糧食資源需求與關聯性日益增加,水能糧資源管理策略的選擇從以往以解決單一問題為導向的思維模式,逐漸被考量資源彼此鍵結關係的交織思維方式所取代。同時考量三者間相互依賴和影響的關係,被認為能避免問題轉移與帶來好處。
WEF Nexus概念雖已被廣泛接受,但因其涉及的面向廣且相對新穎,目前多數WEF Nexus相關文獻僅為替水能糧資源管理策略點出指導方針,對於管理策略的選擇並無一套系統性分析的標準方法。因水能糧資源之間的關聯性錯綜複雜,若透過運用定量評估工具提供將議題數值化的方法,能使決策者有更好的決策依據。本研究即欲運用定量評估工具,從都市代謝的角度出發,以我國為案例分析大尺度水能糧系統環境衝擊之間的關聯性,以供決策參考。 工具選擇上,將物質流分析與生命週期評估進行整合。運用物質流分析釐清水能糧資源從生產到消費過程,以了解各社會經濟部門與水能糧資源部門的角色與作用。再以生命週期評估方法量化環境衝擊作為評估指標。在整體衝擊計算上特別區分水能糧子系統與交織總系統兩種計算方式。同時為檢討資源流量交織係數對結果的影響性,以現況水能糧物質流分析為基礎建立交織關係係數矩陣,針對交織係數進行敏感度分析,而後以目前政府對未來水能糧資源管理策略為情境調整交織係數,以多部門策略情境與單部門策略情境交互比較,觀察多部門策略下策略之間的交互影響作用。由敏感度分析與情境分析的結果,評估在資源需求相同下因為交織關係改變對不同系統環境衝擊的影響。 由現況物質流分析盤查資源流量與流向的結果所建立的交織係數矩陣,可以發現我國以自來水系統、煉油、汽電共生、熱電電廠、灌溉、畜牧、養殖等過程需要水能糧資源投入,而其中自來水廠、公共電廠、汽電共生廠、煉油廠具有以彼此最終產品為需要的雙向關係,故相關最終產品環境衝擊受彼此牽動。 依ReCiPe方法評估環境衝擊之中點類別衝擊指標,在現況水能糧供應結構下,總系統之公用電力在氣候變遷等五項衝擊項;油品在臭氧耗用、游離輻射;自來水在金屬耗用;畜牧產品在陸地生態毒性對衝擊的貢獻最大。其中公用電力以工業需求最大,自來水、畜產品以住宅部門需求最大,油品以出口需求最大。 從現況子系統環境衝擊交織關係上來看,水系統除人體健康、海洋毒性、水資源耗用、金屬耗用項外,能源系統對其餘衝擊影響力巨大。能源系統衝擊貢獻多來自於自身,水系統僅對水資源耗用項具有影響力。糧食系統臭氧耗用、游離輻射、燃料耗用能源系統對其具有一定影響力。 以現況為基礎分析16項交織係數的對衝擊結果的敏感度,發現係數以漏水率對總、水、能系統在溫室氣體、水資源耗用與金屬耗用影響力皆為頭幾大。 以情境分析未來資源管理策略的結果發現,目前政府主要規劃之水能調適策略同時採用的情境,相較於採用單一策略的情境,總系統在陸地生態毒性、淡水生態毒性等衝擊項目衝擊更上升,在水資源耗用、金屬耗用等衝擊項目更具環境效益。但若以子系統來看,對水系統而言在如氣候變遷等七項衝擊項,新興水資源開發計畫造成之衝擊雖在非核家園發電結構下有所減緩,但仍高於基本情境,主要還需靠自身改善水能交織係數。 本研究運用物質流分析結合生命週期評估的方法,將複雜多樣的水能糧資源產品換成環境衝擊指標,使得不同類型資源得到統一的比較標準,並評估不同情境水能糧技術組合下,水能糧系統之間的關聯性。藉由本研究增進對水能糧交織代謝的了解,以期能促進跨部門的協同合作。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | As water, energy and food resource demands and interdependencies continue to increase, the WEF resource management strategies of a single problem-oriented thinking mode have been gradually replaced bythe nexus thinking mode attaching importance to the relationship between different resources. By this way, it is considered to avoid problem transfer and bring co-benefits.
However, although the WEF Nexus concept has been widely accepted, most of the current literature on WEF Nexus only provides guidelines for resource management. There is no standard method for decision making. On account of complex relationship between WEF resources, if quantitative assessment tools are used to provide numerical result for the issue, decision makers can have better decision-making basis. This study intends to use quantitative assessment tools to analyze the correlation of environmental impacts between water, energy and food resources systems on large scales from the perspective of urban metabolism. This study integrates material flow analysis (MFA) with life cycle assessment (LCA) as the tool. MFA is used to clarify the process of water, energy and food from production to consumption to understand the role of various socio-economic sectors and WEF sectors. LCA is used to quantify environmental impact as an evaluation indicator. In the overall impact calculation, the two calculation methods of the WEF subsystem and the total system are distinguished. At the same time, in order to observe the influence of resource nexus relationship on the result, the nexus coefficient matrix established on the basis of the current scenario material flow analysis is used to locate the most influential process in the nexus system regarding environmental impact by a sensitivity analysis. Then, based on the current government's management strategy for the future WEF resources, the nexus coefficient is adjusted as the future scenarios, and the multi-sector strategic scenario are compared with the single-sector strategic scenario. From the results of sensitivity analysis and scenarios analysis, the influences of changes in nexus relationships on the environment impactd of the different system is evaluated under the same resource requirements. By the current scenario MFA, it is found that water treatment, oil refining, steam and electricity symbiosis, thermoelectric power plant, irrigation, livestock, and aquaculture processes require WEF resources which are in the boundary. Among them, the water supply plant, the public power plant, the steam and electricity co-generation plant, and the refinery have bidirectional relationship with each other's final products as needed, so the environmental impact is affected by each other. The midpoint indicators displayed ReCiPe methodology is applied to evaluate the environmental impact. From the current scenario environmental impact result of the total system, the public power contributes the most on seven impact categories such as climate change; the oil product contributes the most on fossil depletion ozone depletion, ionising radiation; the tap water contributes the most on metal depletion; the livestock products contributes the most on terrestrial ecotoxicity. Among them, the public power is the most demanded by the industrial sector; the tap water and the livestock products is the most demanded by residential sector; the oil product is the most demanded by the export. From the current scenario environmental impact result of the subsystem, excluding human toxicity, marine ecotoxicity, water depletion, and metal depletion, the energy system has a main contribution on the rest of the impact in the water system. By contrast, the main contribution of energy system impacts comes from itself, and only on water depletion, the water system is influential. When it come to the food system, ozone depletion, ionising radiation, and fossil depletion energy systems is influential. The sensitivity of the 16 nexus coefficients to the current scenario impact results is analyzed. It is found that the coefficient of water leakage is the first to influence the total, water and energy systems on climate change, water depletion and metal depletion. The future scenarios analysis shows that the water-energy bi-strategy scenario has more impact than the single-strategy scenario on terrestrial ecotoxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity; and more improvement on water depletion and metal depletion for total system. In contrast with total system, for water system, on seven impact categories such as climate change, the impact of the water resources development plan has slowed down under the non-nuclear home power generation structure, but it is still higher than the basic scenario. It is mainly necessary to improve the water energy nexus coefficient by itself. In conclusion, this study uses material flow analysis combined with life cycle assessment methods to convert a variety of products from resource quantities to environmental impact indicators as a unified comparison standard, and assess the environment impact relationship between WEF systems under different scenarios of water-energy technologies. Through this study, we improve the understanding of the metabolism of WEF nexus systems, with a view to promoting cross-sectoral synergy benefit. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-05-11T05:00:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-R05541137-1.pdf: 7432099 bytes, checksum: a259f5b69c181dca15c4d1721b61e16f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員審定書 i
誌謝 ii 摘要 iii Abstract v 圖目錄 xi 表目錄 xiii 第一章 前言 1 1.1 研究動機 1 1.2 研究目的 4 1.3 研究架構 5 第二章 文獻回顧 6 2.1 水-能源-糧食交織 6 2.1.1 水-能源-糧食交織議題發展背景 6 2.1.2 水-能源-糧食交織關係研究現況 11 2.1.3 水-能源-糧食交織研究方法工具 16 2.2 物質流分析 24 2.2.1 物質流分析的目的與應用 24 2.2.2 不同時空尺度與標的物的物質流分析 26 2.2.3 物質流分析的方法與步驟 30 2.2.4 於WEF Nexus中運用物質流分析 32 2.3 生命週期評估 34 2.3.1 生命週期評估的目的與應用 34 2.3.2 生命週期評估的方法與步驟 36 2.3.3 生命週期評估衝擊評估方法 38 2.3.4 於WEF Nexus中運用生命週期評估 40 2.3.5 生命週期評估與物質流分析結合運用 42 2.4 我國水能糧系統現況與發展趨勢 43 2.4.1 水系統 43 2.4.2 能源系統 46 2.4.3 糧食系統 47 第三章 研究方法 48 3.1 物質流結合生命週期評估 48 3.1.1 方法流程 48 3.1.2 物質流分析階段 52 3.1.3 生命週期評估階段 56 3.1.4 情境分析/敏感度分析 63 3.2 研究案例 66 3.2.1 目標與範疇界定 66 3.2.2 資料來源與假設 67 3.2.3 2025情境分析設定 77 第四章 結果與討論 84 4.1 現況WEF Nexus系統物質流分析 84 4.1.1 WEF Nexus物質流系統分析 84 4.1.2 WEF子系統物質流流量分析 91 4.1.3 WEF Nexus總系統物質流熱點分析 101 4.2 現況WEF Nexus系統環境衝擊分析 104 4.2.1 WEF子系統衝擊熱點分析 104 4.2.2 WEF Nexus總系統衝擊熱點分析 108 4.3 現況環境衝擊結果敏感度分析 111 4.3.1 總/子系統衝擊結果比較 111 4.4 2025年情境分析 119 4.4.1 WEF物質流流量比較 120 4.4.2 單位最終產品衝擊比較 121 4.4.3 總/子系統衝擊結果比較 123 4.4.4 子系統衝擊分析 126 4.4.5 總系統衝擊分析 131 第五章 結論與建議 134 5.1 結論 134 5.2 建議 136 參考文獻 138 附錄 151 附錄A未來情境交織係數矩陣 151 附錄B ecoinvent資料庫 153 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 整合物質流分析與生命週期評估探討台灣水-能源-糧食交織系統的環境衝擊 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Integrating Material Flow Analysis with Life Cycle Assessment to Analyze Environmental Impacts of Water-Energy-Food Nexus System in Taiwan | en |
dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 闕蓓德,陳起鳳 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 水-能源-糧食交織,物質流分析,生命週期評估,都市代謝,資源調適策略評估, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Water-Energy-Food Nexus,life cycle assessment,material flow analysis,urban metabolism,scenarios analysis, | en |
dc.relation.page | 153 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201802027 | |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | |
dc.date.accepted | 2019-07-26 | |
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 | 7.26 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
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。