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：

    JOET@itri.org.tw

  • 總編輯：

    王漢英胡均立

  • 顧問：

    王運銘童遷祥楊日昌

  • 執行主編：

    劉子衙陳志臣

  • 編輯委員：

    方良吉王錫福李堅明李叢禎林師模馬鴻文陳介力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4卷第4期內容

出刊日期：December, 2017

題目
我國能源脆弱度分析與因應策略建議
Title
The Study of Energy Vulnerability Indicators in Taiwan and Strategy Suggestions
作者
梁啟源、劉致峻、鄭睿合、呂易恂、郭博堯
Authors
Chi-Yuan Liang, Chih-Chun Liu, Ruei-He Jheng, Yi-Hsun Lu, Po-Yao Kuo
摘要
依據2009年全國能源會議結論，能源不僅是社會經濟活動的基礎，更具國家安全的戰略重要性，各國視能源安全等同國家安全，故應提升能源安全議題位階，重點之一在建立預警指標，以進行風險管理與應變機制。故本文參考世界能源理事會(World Energy Council, 2010)和Frondel and Schimdt (2013)之分析架構，以初級能源供應、基礎設施和最終能源消費等構面，並考量我國本土能源系統的特性進行修改，量化我國能源系統的脆弱程度，組成包括三大構面與十五項次指標，並經過標準化方式以0-100量化呈現。數值愈高，表示相關風險愈高，脆弱度亦愈高。此外，本文考量能源系統本為一體，若是任何一個構面出現問題，就對整體能源系統帶來衝擊，故總能源脆弱度以取各構面脆弱度最大值來呈現，從而解析我國歷年能源脆弱度變化，並據以提出因應策略。實證結果顯示，在1990年第一季至2017年第二季間，初級能源供應脆弱度受惠於進口來源的多元化，由90.16大幅降至32.46；最終能源消費脆弱度則因國際能源價格的劇烈波動，僅從85.79小幅降為80.54，呈現偏高與震盪態勢；相對上基礎設施脆弱度由65.54躍升為97.94，主要原因在於天然氣消費量持續增加，現有天然氣輸儲設備應接不暇，加上電源開發推展不順，使得我國備用和備轉容量率屢創新低。總的來說，我國總能源脆弱程度的變化，長期受基礎設施面的完備性及需求面的國際能源價格變化影響，近年更因電源和天然氣基礎建設不足，總脆弱度已接近過往幾次重大事件時的高點，此為本文建立之能源脆弱度所顯示的政策意涵，與傳統只著重供應面的能源安全指標之相異處。鑑於能源基礎設施的增設要進行規劃、評估與建置，往往耗時較長。因此，政府要達成能源轉型政策的目標，宜務實評估期程，並保有彈性空間，妥善運用各類現有發電機組；在應對目前供電缺口所採行的短期應變措施，仍應考慮投入成本與環境承受能力。其次，當務之急為加速增設天然氣接收站、管線及儲存設備，以因應國內不斷增長的天然氣需求，降低供氣中斷的風險。再者，偏高的負載率加上偏低的備轉容量代表抑低尖峰負載空間有限，且機組長期高負荷運轉而難以檢修維護，加上長期存在的區域電力供需失衡狀況，加深電網脆弱度，故增加電力供應及平衡區域供電才是治本之道。此外，為推動再生能源，宜早日推動將再生能源有效併入電網的措施，以降低對電力系統穩定性的影響，並讓民眾瞭解其成本對電價的必然影響。最後，提升能源效率仍為降低消費面脆弱度的有效方式，政府不宜再補貼能源價格，透過能源價格合理化反映真實成本，才能導正能源用戶的消費行為，進而增進能源效率。
關鍵字
能源脆弱度，能源安全，基礎設施，能源效率
Abatract
According to the conclusion of the National Energy Conference in 2009, energy is not only the basis of social economic activities but also plays a strategic role in national security. In order to establish the mechanism of risk management, it is important to establish an early warning indicator of energy security. For this, we revise the framework of World Energy Council (WEC, 2010) and the work of Frondel and Schimdt (2013) to construct the energy vulnerability indicator. The Energy Vulnerability Indicator of Taiwan which is composed of three main vulnerability indicators. That is primary energy supply vulnerability (PEV), infrastructure vulnerability (IV), and end-use energy (final energy consumption) vulnerability (EEV). Comparing with the conventional energy security indicators such as U.S. Energy Security Risk Index, Energy Architecture Performance Index or Energy Trilemma Index which mainly focus on supply-side and macro-level, this energy vulnerability indicator focuses not only supply-side but also infrastructure and demand side. Besides, all indicators are standardized to 0-100 scale to quantify the energy vulnerability in Taiwan, the higher the standardized value of the indicators show the higher the risk and the vulnerability is. In addition, instead of employing a weighted average, this study chooses the maximum value of the main vulnerability indicators to calculate the Energy Vulnerability Indicator, because the energy system as a whole would crash even if only one of PEV, IV, and EEV is in danger. The empirical results show that the PEV has dropped sharply from 90.16 to 32.46 during 1990 Q1 to 2017 Q2, due to the increasing diversity of the source of energy imported. The EEV has increased from 85.79 to 100 during 1990 Q1 to 2008 Q3 and reversed to 80.54 in 2017 Q2, showing a dramatic fluctuation in the last decade as a result of international energy prices’ changes. The IV has deteriorated from 65.54 to 97.94 because of lack of storage and regasification facilities of natural gas, and the low reserve margin and operating reserve of electricity. In general, the Energy Vulnerability in Taiwan has been driven mainly by the infrastructure vulnerability and energy price change. It is now close to the highest vulnerability level during the sample period, such as electricity rationing in the early 1990s and the unprecedentedly high oil price in 2008. This is the main difference between Energy Vulnerability Indicator proposed by this study and the other conventional energy security indicators focused on supply-side factors. It is suggested that the government should pragmatically reassess the direction, objectives, and timetable of current energy transformation policy, remaining the flexibility to use existed various types of power generation, and reconsider the environmental impact and social cost of the short-term emergency generators. In addition, to reduce the risk of the disruption of gas supply, it is necessary to construct new LNG receiving stations, storage, and pipelines to match the growing domestic demand for natural gas. The high load factor in recent years implies the limitation of load management, such as peak clipping, valley filling, and load shifting. And hence to increase the power supply and to balance the regional gap between supply and demand is essential for reducing the energy vulnerability in Taiwan. As for the development of interruptive renewable energy, effective measures for its electricity grid integration are critical to reducing the impact on grid stability. Finally, enhancing energy efficiency is also a very important way to reduce the vulnerability of energy consumption. The government should not subsidize energy prices any longer. It should allow the energy prices to reflect real cost for inducing the energy users to improve their energy efficiency.
Keywords
Energy Vulnerability, Energy Security, Infrastructure, Energy Efficiency
全文下載/Download