臺灣能源期刊發行
- 創刊日期：
102年11月30日
- 發行所：
經濟部能源署
- 發行人：
游振偉
- 地址：
台北市復興北路2號13樓
- 電話：
02-2772-1370
- 執行單位：
財團法人工業技術研究院
- 地址：
新竹縣竹東鎮中興路四段195號26館
- 服務專線：
03-5916006
- 服務信箱：
- 總編輯：
王漢英胡均立
- 顧問：
王運銘童遷祥王人謙
- 執行主編：
劉子衙陳志臣
- 編輯委員：
方良吉王錫福朱家齊李堅明李叢禎林師模馬鴻文陳希立廖芳玲廖肇寧劉文獻蕭志同顧洋(依筆畫順序排列)
:::
臺灣能源期刊論文全文
臺灣能源期刊第3卷第3期內容
出刊日期：September, 2016
- 題目
- 綠色校園智慧節能系統之成本效益分析：中興大學 畜產試驗所案例
- Title
- Cost Benefit Analysis of Smart Energy Saving System in Green Campus: The Case of Livestock Research Field of National Chung-Hsing University
- 作者
- 許志義、鄭彙齡、鄧蓉
- Authors
- Jyh-Yih Hsu, Hwei-Ling Cheng, Jung Deng
- 摘要
- 本研究旨在評估綠色校園智慧節能系統之經濟效益。為了達成此一目的，本文以中興大學烏 日畜產試驗所校區為實證案例，利用該校區溫室蘭花栽培場、屋頂型太陽能發電系統之農牧場與雞 舍、追日式太陽能發電系統、以及移動式農牧場廢棄物能源熱電轉換設施，將這些物件緊密整合成 一套智慧能源雲端管理系統，加以運作。同時，針對此一案例進行成本效益分析，分別由參與者 (亦即學校主體)觀點及整體社會觀點加以評估。其結果顯示：在現行技術水準及市場環境下，不論 是參與者檢定或社會成本檢定，均未能通過符合經濟凈效益的門檻，其兩者的益本比，分別為0.78 以及0.79。值得注意的，本研究在未新增智慧綠能農牧設備之參與者檢定即為0.78，其原因為在於 目前在商品市場中畜產肥料成本過高，並非綠能投入所導致的不符成本，而在投入智慧綠能系統之 後，其益本比並未有下降之趨勢，而在社會成本檢定中，加入二氧化碳排放計算，益本比亦有小幅 升高的結果，可以推測建立綠能農牧場對整體學校節能是有益的。而本研究社會成本效益分析範 圍，僅考量二氧化碳排放減量的外部效益，並未納入此一智慧能源管理系統潛在的能源教育功效在 內。這些不易納入量化分析的外部效益，是否可能翻轉成本效益分析的檢定門檻，值得後續研究予 以探討。
- 關鍵字
- 綠色校園、智慧能源管理系統、成本效益分析、參與者檢定、社會成本檢定
- Abatract
- This study was designed to evaluate the economic benefits of smart energy-saving systems in green campus. In order to achieve this objective, this paper uses Wurih Livestock Research Campus of National Chung Hsing University as an empirical case. This research campus has an orchid cultivation greenhouse, cow and chicken raising houses with solar power generation system of the roof, and utilized the waste for thermoelectric energy conversion portable facilities. All of these independent systems were tightly integrated into a Smart Energy Cloud Management System for operational efficiency. Next, cost-benefit analysis was conducted from two different perspectives. One is from the private viewpoint, i.e., participant cost test. The other is from the public viewpoint, i.e., societal cost test. The results show that at the current level of technology and market environment, both participant cost test and social cost test were not in line with net economic benefit criterion. The benefit cost ratios are both about 0.78. It is worthy to mention that in this study the carbon dioxide emissions reduction is the only factor to be included for consideration of external benefits, not including the potential benefits of energy education, derived from the green campus smart energy-saving system. By including this educational benefit quantitative analysis, there might be a possibility of passing the benefit cost ratio threshold for societal cost test. It is worthy to conduct such a further study to be explored.
- Keywords
- Green Campus, Smart Energy Management System, Cost Benefit Analysis, Participant Cost Test, Societal Cost Test