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5卷第2期內容
出刊日期：June, 2018
- 題目
- 多元能源風險評估方法論整合與應用
- Title
- Application of an Integrated Multi-Energy Risk Assessment Methodology
- 作者
- 張耀仁、黃孔良、韓佳佑、馮君強、柴蕙質、葛復光
- Authors
- Yao-Jen Chang, Kong-Liang Hunag, Chia-Yu Han, Chun-Chiang Feng, Hui-Chih Chai, Fu-Kuang Ko
- 摘要
- 「能源風險」是當前全球能源面臨的重要議題，因能源風險不只關係到國家經濟產業發展，嚴重甚至會危及國家安全，而對高度倚賴能源進口的我國更無法置身事外。本研究運用美國商會國際版能源安全風險指標、歐盟永續能源系統成本評估及線上問卷調查建置多元能源風險評估方法論，評估國家能源政策之能源安全、環境衝擊及社會風險，並以INER-TIMES能源工程與INER-GEMEET能源經濟模型共同模擬之基準與減碳情境為評估標的，進行未來年多元能源風險量化評估。根據評估結果顯示：兩情境至2050年能源安全風險程度皆逐年升高，但減碳情境的幅度相對較小，因減碳情境逐年提高再生能源、燃氣及具碳捕捉之燃煤發電，因而大幅降低對燃煤發電的依存度，所以同時提升電力供應的多樣性與降低環境衝擊程度。基準情境因逐年增加燃煤發電而使環境衝擊程度逐年上升。根據問卷調查結果，至2030年時，基準情境可能遭遇的社會風險約為減碳情境的1.5倍，原因為有很大比例受訪者不支持燃煤發電。整體來說，本研究減碳情境未來年的能源安全、環境衝擊及社會風險的量化評估結果皆低於基準情境。證實擴大再生能源與深度減碳有助於未來長期建立更安全、永續且社會可接受之能源發展路徑。
- 關鍵字
- 能源風險，能源安全，環境衝擊，社會風險，減碳
- Abatract
- Energy risk is an important issue facing the world today. It will affect not only national economics and industries but also security. This study employed international index of U.S. energy security risk, cost assessment for sustainable energy system of the EU and online questionnaire to establish a multi-energy risk assessment tool. This tool was used to evaluate national energy security, environmental damage and social risk for energy policies. Both BAU and decarbonization scenarios simulated by the INER-TIMES model with INER-GEMEET model were designated as research subject. The results show that both scenarios will raise energy security risk levels from 2015 to 2050. The risk levels of the deccarbonization scenario are smaller than the BAU scenario. The deccarbonization scenario employs a lot of low and zero carbon technologies, such as renewable energy, gas-fired and coal-fired with capture. It reduces dependence on coal-fired generation. For this reason, the deccarbonization scenario will increase power supply diversity and reduces environmental damage in the future years. The BAU scenario will increase environmental damage from 2015 to 2050 because it still depends on large number of coal-fired generation. In 2030, social risk levels of the BAU scenario will be one and a half times as much as the decarbonization scenario because a large of proportion of respondents do not support coal-fired generation. Overall, the energy security risk, environmental damage and social risk for the decarbonization scenario will be lower than the BAU scenario from 2015 to 2050. For long-term planning, promoting renewable energy and deep decarbonization will be helpful to establish safe, environmentally sustainable and socially acceptable energy roadmap.
- Keywords
- energy risk, energy security risk, environmental damage, social risk, decarbonization