透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.224.214.215
  • 學位論文

鮮乳產品碳足跡的計算及改善策略之研究

The Carbon Footprint Invention of Fresh Milk and Its Amelioration

指導教授 : 周崇熙
共同指導教授 : 陳億乘(Yi-Chen Chen)

摘要


本研究重點在於探討國內畜產品中乳製品之碳足跡(Carbon footprint),其主目的可用於評估產品整體生命週期(Life cycle)中對於環境衝擊之程度;故藉調查結果中,可作為改善生產流程及消費者使用習慣之方針,進而將產品對環境的衝擊度降至最低,可有效改善氣候變遷,對於現行之人畜共通傳染疾病,有一定的幫助。另一方面,鮮乳為人類蛋白質來源中重要之一環,也是造成碳排放(Carbon emission)重大的原因之一,調查對象為台灣大學、嘉義大學之教學牧場,及金門縣畜產試驗所產銷之鮮乳。主要研究方向有四:(i)針對同年度中,不同單位及不同畜養頭隻數量中所造成之碳排放差異;(ii)後續消費端的使用習慣是否有造成更大的差距、(iii)同調查單位中碳足跡之變化狀況以及探討在台灣,降低碳足跡之後的後續發展及利用、(iv)試著以調查結果針對各調查單位提出改善策略。結果如下:(i)教學牧場所產鮮乳相較於金門縣畜試所之碳足跡,有明顯較高之狀況,特別在製造過程中,教學牧場鮮乳造成之碳排放高出15%~77%(台大牧場:1.29KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,嘉大牧場:0.84KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,金門縣畜試所:0.73KgCO2(e)/Kg milk);(ii) 消費者及商家的使用習慣確然造成碳足跡之改變,品牌優勢及數量將會造成在消費者使用所造成之碳足跡降低(台大牧場:0.13KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,嘉大牧場:0.28KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,金門縣畜試所:0.20KgCO2(e)/Kg milk);(iii) 針對同一單位中之狀況,其畜養政策方針會明顯改變生產階段碳足跡之趨勢,變動幅度可高達60%之巨(金門畜試所2012年:1.17KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,2011年:0.73KgCO2(e)/Kg milk);(iv) 台大牧場方面,若從提升飼養頭數及使用在地原料切入,則可降低15%現有碳足跡(現今:3.26 KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,改良:2.77KgCO2(e)/Kg milk);嘉大牧場方面,除使用在地原料外,也可從運輸路徑及回收方面做改良,共可降低8%之總碳足跡(現有情況:3.20 KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,改良後2.96KgCO2(e)/Kg milk);最後為金門縣畜試所,將島上運輸路線最佳化及配合政策提升回收率,將可降低6%總碳足跡(現今:3.05 KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,改良:2.89 KgCO2(e)/Kg milk);總結,以公共衛生及預防醫學之角度而言,碳足跡為一項監控流行疫病暨牧場管理之技術,若能將碳足跡盤查技術引進至各畜產品中,並且能針對碳排放量較大之階段落實改善,在無須改變民眾飲食習慣與兼具食品安全之前提下,將可提升能源利用效率及經濟效益;但碳足跡並非唯一衡量氣候變遷之工具,過度追求碳排放減量會適得其反,唯有妥善利用本工具才可替人類未來創造出更大之功效。

並列摘要


The research focuses on investigating the carbon footprint of domestic animal products. Carbon footprint is a significant topic which covering various domain in daily life, assessing the impact on environment from the whole life cycle of the products. Therefore, by surveying the carbon footprint of animal products, it may offer improved proposals to manufacturers or terminal consumers, what is more reducing the impact to environment from products, effectively improving the existing climatic deterioration and descending the incidence rate of zoonotic disease. Milk is an important animal product which providing animal protein, also causing significant carbon emission. The study about carbon footprint of milk from three sources: National Taiwan University educational farm (NTU farm), National Chia-Yi University educational farm (NCYU farm) and Livestock Research Institute (LRI farm) in Kimmen county, and trying to realize four targets: (i) The difference of carbon emissions in each institutions in same year. (ii) Figure out if there is any difference between the usages of terminal consumers. (iii) The continuous change of carbon footprint in same institution. (iv) Try to propose improvement plan from finding. And the result comes: (i) The carbon footprint of milk from two educational farms are higher than the one from Livestock Research Institute, and the latter is especially 13-43% lower than the former on producing process (NTU farm: 1.29KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,NCYU farm:0.84KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,LRI:0.73KgCO2(e)/Kg milk). (ii) The habit of customers and retailers could make carbon emission differences because the brand advantage and quantity (NTU farm: 0.13KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,NCYU farm:0.28KgCO2(e)/Kg milk,LRI:0.20KgCO2(e)/Kg milk). (iii) The policy guidelines alternation could make carbon footprint dramatic change on producing stage in the same institution, about 60% (LRI:1.17KgCO2(e)/Kg milk in 2012 and 0.73KgCO2(e)/Kg milk in 2011). (iv) NTU farm: By rising herd and domestic forage using ratio,it could lower 15% carbon footprint (Now: 3.26 KgCO2(e)/Kg milk; Improved: 2.77KgCO2(e)/Kg milk); NCYU farm,Besides rising domestic forage using ratio, optimizing transporting route and recycle could lower 8% carbon footprint (Now: 3.20 KgCO2(e)/Kg milk; Improved: 2.96KgCO2(e)/Kg milk); LRI farm,By optimizing transporting route and recycle, it could lower 6% carbon footprint (Now: 3.05 KgCO2(e)/Kg milk; Improved: 2.89 KgCO2(e)/Kg milk);In public health and preventive medicine view, carbon footprint is a tool which could monitor epidemic disease and manage farm; By applying the technology to every animal products and improving high carbon emission portion, it could rise efficiency of energy using and economic. But carbon footprint is not the only one tool to measure climate change, excessively pursuing will cause the opposite effect; Only by proper using the tool could make greater benefit in the future.

參考文獻


行政院環境保護署。(2007)。一般廢棄物資源循環推動計畫。台北市。
行政院環境保護署。(2009)。各燃料排放係數表。
張韋豪。(2011)。台灣半導體產業環境管理與碳足跡現況及生命週期評估軟體需求探討。臺北科技大學環境工程與管理研究所學位論文,1-186。
楊士瑩。(2012)。染料敏化太陽能電池生命週期之碳足跡及水足跡評估。臺北科技大學環境工程與管理研究所學位論文,1-88。
楊天樹。(2011)。氣候變遷與家畜禽健康的脆弱性。

延伸閱讀