透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.144.97.126
  • 學位論文

電力系統低碳能源政策之實質選擇價值評估

Real Option Valuation on Low-carbon Energy Policy of Power System

指導教授 : 李堅明
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


電力系統低碳能源政策之實質選擇價值評估 廖喜堂 2012.6 摘要 台灣永續能源政策綱領(2008)已制定2025年溫室氣體減量目標,同時規劃至少要達到55%低碳與無碳能源(包括天然氣、再生能源與核能)目標。然而,受到日本福島核災影響,政府於2011年11月公布之新能源政策,確立逐步邁向非核家園願景。政府如果落實新能源政策,則為達到2025年溫室氣體減量及低碳與無碳能源目標,應由何種能源(如煤炭、天然氣或再生能源)取代核能發電缺口?以及其對發電成本及CO2減量目標將產生何種影響?均是政府推動新能源政策必須考慮的課題。 近年來,隨著淨煤技術(或稱碳捕獲與封存技術(carbon capture and storage, CCS)的快速發展,已有愈來愈多國家(例如歐盟制定CCS指令(2009)),將其列為國家低碳目標的技術選項,因此,忽略淨煤技術(或稱碳捕獲與封存技術(carbon capture and storage, CCS))發展的潛力,可能導致國家低碳能源發展目標不具成本有效性。基於此,本研究引入選擇價值方法(option value method),並納入碳價不確定性因子,評估2020年與2025年整合CCS與低碳與無碳發展目標之政策選擇價值,提供政府施政參考。本研究發現,淨煤技術的引入,的確會促進經濟成長與溫室氣體排放脫鉤,有助於溫室氣體減量目標達成,然而,亦會帶動發電成本的大幅上升。實質選擇分析指出,引入淨煤技術,應提升燃煤配比,致台灣低碳與無碳能源配比應由目前40%水準,擴充至49%之政策選擇價值最高,易言之,永續能源政策綱領的55%低碳與無碳能源配比,並不符合台灣長期發展利益。 關鍵詞:實質選擇價值、淨煤技術、溫室氣體脫鉤、發電成本 JEL 分類: Q21, Q25, Q28

並列摘要


Applying Real Option Value Model to Evaluate CCS and New Energy Policy in Taiwan Liao, Hsi-Tang June, 2012 ADVISOR:Dr. Lee, Chien-Ming DEPARTMENT:Institute of Natural Resource and Management MAJOR:Natural Resource Management DEGREE:Master of Arts Abstract Under the Sustainable Energy Policy Guidance (SEPG, 2008) in Taiwan, there is a low carbon energy technology development target (no less than 55% share) to be achieved by 2025. In addition, a new energy policy was announced in 2011. Under this new energy policy, the nuclear power share will be gradually phased out. This paper uses a real option pricing method to estimate the value of low carbon electric technologies, as well as carbon capture and storage (CCS), in the face of uncertain carbon prices. This is to make sure of an optimal new energy policy for Taiwan. The real option value analysis indicates it should increase coal share with CCS to substitute nuclear power generation share, when implementing the new energy policy. Besides this, results show that low carbon energy share has reached 49%, the highest option value in Taiwan. This indicates that the 55% share target of low carbon energy is sub-optimal in Taiwan. Keywords: real option value, carbon capture and storage (CCS), CO2 decoupling, electricity cost JEL classification: Q21, Q25, Q28

參考文獻


胡均立、林瑞珠 (2010),「臺灣推動碳捕捉與封存技術之經濟可行性初探」,
潘欽(2010),「新能源科技與產業發展」
Ansar, J., and R., Sparks (2009),“The experience curve, option value, and the energy paradox, ”Energy Policy, 37: p. 1012-1020.
Chao and Wilson (1993) ,“Flexibility Premium in Marketable Permits. ”
Colpier, C. U. and D. Cornland.(2002),“The economics of the combined cycle gas turbine-an experience curve analysis, ” Energy Policy, Vol. 30, p.309-316.

延伸閱讀