溫室氣體減量之清潔發展機制功能與專案成本比較

Comparison of Emission Reduction Cost among Different Project Types of the Clean Development Mechanism

吳珮瑛(Pei-Ing Wu) ； 邱可甄(Ke-Zhen Qiu) ； 劉哲良(Je-Liang Liou)

《台灣國際研究季刊》 12卷3期 (2016/09) Pp. 115-150

摘要

本文之目的在探討清潔發展機制（CDM）自2004年第一個註冊的專案開始，至本文進行前之2014年12月止，參與雙邊及多邊CDM機制的21個投資國，至不同主辦國進行「再生能源」、「甲烷減量與煤礦甲烷或煤層氣之減量」、「燃料轉換」、「供給面能源效率」、「需求面能源效率」及「避免甲烷逸散」等六種主要CDM專案類型，所完成的4,061個專案計畫之平均減量成本比較。此外，本文亦討論CDM的定位及目標，同時探討影響CDM專案在不同主辦國間的分布情形，及影響投資國執行CDM專案的可能因素。結果顯示，不論是那一種專案類型，由不同投資國執行相同類型專案的每公噸平均減量成本，或是同一個投資國執行不同專案類型的平均每公噸減量成本，均有很明顯的差異。其中比利時所執行的「甲浣減量」專案的平均減量成本最小、平均每公噸為3.61美元，愛爾蘭的「需求面能源效率」專案之平均減量成本最高，平均每公噸為5,715.89美元。又整體而言「再生能源」專案在21個投資國的平均每噸減量成本最高，其次為「甲烷減量」專案類型；反之，「避免甲浣逸散」專案，每噸減量成本最低。

關鍵字

投資國 ； 減量成本 ； 清潔發展機制專案類型 ； 技術競爭力 ； 京都議定書

並列摘要

The purpose of this study is to explore and compare the emission reduction cost for all types of projects implemented under the clean development mechanism (CDM). The results show that the average emission reduction cost conducted by different credit countries for a specific type of project varies significantly. Similarly, the average emission reduction cost varies among projects conducted by a specific credit country. Among these, the project of CH4 reduction and coal mine/ bed methane conducted by Belgium has the lowest average emission reduction cost. And the project of demand-side energy efficiency conducted by Ireland has the highest average emission reduction cost, i.e. 5,715.89 US $/ton. Overall, projects of renewables have relatively high average emission reduction cost and projects of CH4 reduction and coal mine/bed methane is ranked as the second.

並列關鍵字

credit country ； emission reduction cost ； project type of clean development mechanism ； technologicalcompleteness ； Kyoto Protocol

參考文獻

Eckermann, Frauke , Alistair Hunt, Marcus Stronzik, and Tim Taylor . 2004. “The Role of Transaction Costs and Risk Premia in the Determination of Climate Change Policy Responses.” Discussion Paper, No. 03-59. Mannheim, Germany: Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (http://ub-madoc.bib.unimannheim.de/143/1/ZEW32.pdf) (2015/10/02).

Ellis, Jane and Katia Karousakis. 2006. “The Developing CDM Market: May 2006 Update,” Working Paper, No. JT03210071. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development/ International Energy Agency (https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/DevelopingCDM.pdf) (2015/12/02).

Energy Information Administration. 1998. Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol on U.S. Energy Markets and Economic Activity. Washington, D.C.: Energy Information Administration. (http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/674900) (2016/04/22).

Fenhann, Joergen and Miriam Hinostrozan. 2011. CDM Information and Guidebook (3rd Edition). UNEP Risoe Centre on Energy, Climate and Sustainable Development National Laboratory for Sustainable Energy Technical University of Denmark. Roskilde, Denmark: United Nations Environment Programme. (http://cd4cdm.org/Publications/cdm_guideline_3rd_edition.pdf) (2015/12/12).

Hepburn, Cameron. 2007. “Carbon Trading: A Review of the Kyoto Mechanisms.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Vol. 32, pp. 375-93.