應用層級分析法探討台灣生質能發展之關鍵因素

Application of Analytical Hierarchy Analysis in Determination of Key Factors for Biomass Energy Development

陳幼萍(Yu-Ping Chen)

指導教授 ： 白子易 ； 張迪惠

朝陽科技大學/理工學院/環境工程與管理系/碩士(2012年)

摘要

摘 要

地球資源漸漸耗竭，國內高度倚賴進口能源，面對原油價格不斷高漲，嚴重影響國家能源安全；再者，燃燒化石燃料是CO 2 最大的來源，也是造成溫室效應的元凶，因此積極發展綠色替代能源及再生能源日顯急迫。其中生質能被視為最具發展潛力之再生能源，為目前各國所積極開發。透過以政府政策為主軸，整合經濟、技術、能源教育等各層面，推動發展生質能，才能真正營造永續發展的環境。
本研究以學者、政府機關、環保團體及一般民眾為對象，應用層級分析法 (Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP) 成對比較過程，獲得要素間相對重要性的權重值，建立權重優先順序，以提供相關單位有參考價值之訊息。分析結果如下：
一、在評估要素層，整體專家認為最重要的要素依序為：「政策面」(0.481)、「技術面」(0.233)、「經濟面」(0.191)、「能源教育面」(0.094)。
二、在「政策面」要素準則層，整體專家認為最重要的準則依序為：「政府積極發展綠色能源產業」(0.314)、「追求低碳與低污染能源供給與消費方式」(0.258)、「政府明定生質能產業發展時程」(0.249)、「提高再生能源發電佔總供給電量比例」(0.179)。
三、在「經濟面」要素準則層，整體專家認為最重要的準則依序為：「補助

願意發展及引進新技術之廠商」(0.309)、「政府保障收購電價」(0.267)、「提供生質能產業初期創設之補貼」(0.187)、「提供生質能產業租稅減免或優惠」(0.184)。
四、在「技術面」要素準則層，整體專家認為最重要的準則依序為：「鼓勵廠商發展生質能發電新技術」(0.469)、「持續研發具有潛力及展望的技術項目」(0.244)、「爭取國內廠商與國際生質能發電廠商合作」(0.152)、「開發能源作物來源」(0.136)
五、在「能源教育面」下要素準則層，整體專家認為最重要的準則依序為：「再生能源概念納入終身教育的重點」(0.326)、「訓練專業教育人員」(0.233)、「規劃具有特色之生質能教育設施及資源」(0.223)、「編列充足的教育宣導經費」(0.217)。
六、本研究整體有效問卷認為最優先重視的前5項準則依序為「政府積極發展綠色能源產業」(0.163)、「追求低碳與低污染能源供給與消費方式」(0.132)、「鼓勵廠商發展生質能發電新技術」(0.113)、「政府明定生質能產業發展時程」(0.109)及「提高再生能源發電佔總供給電量比例」(0.078)。

關鍵字

層級分析法 ； 能源教育 ； 再生能源 ； 生質能

並列摘要

Abstract
Global resources have been gradually exhausted. As Taiwan highly depends on exported energy, continuous rise of crude oil price seriously affects national energy safety. Moreover, combustion of fossil fuel is the major source of CO2 and the culprit of greenhouse effect. Active development of green alternative energy and renewable energy becomes an urgent issue. Biomass is regarded as the most potential renewable energy and has been developed by many countries. Based on the government polices, biomass development can be promoted by integrating economy, technology and energy education to create environment for sustainable development.
This study investigated the opinions of the experts, governmental departments, environmental organizations and the public, and conducted Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for pairwise comparison to obtain the weights of relative importance between elements, in order to construct weight priority and provide information reference for relevant departments. The analysis results are as follows:
1. In evaluation of elements layer, the most important elements considered by experts are prioritized as follows: “policy” (0.481), “technology” (0.233), “economy” (0.191) and “energy education” (0.094).
2. In policy criterion layer, the most sub-criteria considered by the experts are prioritized as follows: “active development of green energy industry by government” (0.314), “supply and consumption method of low-carbon and low-pollution energy” (0.258), “government-specified biomass industry development schedule” (0.249), and “increase of percentage of power generation from renewable energy in total power supply” (0.179).
3. In economy criterion layer, the most sub-criteria considered by the experts are prioritized as follows: “provide subsidy for manufacturers who are willing to develop and introduce new technology” (0.309), “government-guaranteed purchasing price” (0.267), “provide subsidy for biomass entrepreneurs” (0.187), and “taxation reduction, exemption or preference” (0.184).
4. In technical criterion layer, the experts believe that the most important sub-criteria were: “encourage manufacturers to develop new biomass power generation technology” (0.469), “continually develop the technology projects which has potential and prospects in the future” (0.244), “gain the co-operation between domestic manufacturers and international cooperation in biomass generators” (0.152), “developing sources of energy crops” (0.136) .
5. In energy education criterion layer, the most important sub-criteria considered by the experts are prioritized as follows: “renewable energy concept is incorporated into lifelong education” (0.326), “training of educational staff” (0.233), “biomass education facilities and resources” (0.223), and “preparation of sufficient educational budgets” (0.217).
6. The five top sub-criteria in the valid questionnaires are prioritized: “active development of green energy industry by government” (0.163), “supply and consumption method of low-carbon and low-pollution energy”(0.132), “encouragement of biomass power generation technology” (0.113), “government-specified biomass development schedule” (0.109) and “increase of percentage of power generation from renewable energy in total power supply” (0.078).

並列關鍵字

Analytic Hierarchy Process ； energy education ； renewable energy ； biomass

參考文獻

4. 王聖章，「台灣生質能源產業組合以及創新政策之研究」，碩士論文，國立交通大學管理學院碩士在職專班管理科學組，新竹 (2009)。

6. 左峻德，「我國發展生質能源產業之可行性」，農業生技產業季刊，第9期，第56-61頁。

11. 吳耿東，「第二代生質燃料之開發與展望」，生物科技產學論壇生質能源特刊，第十期，第10-17頁 (2007)。

25. 邱佩冠，「再生能源的發展—以美國再生能源發展為例」，全球變遷通訊雜誌第四十四期 (民93年12月)30-32，臺北 (2004)。

33. 莊清寶，「永續校園及其多角化經營策略：以臺北縣深坑國小為例」，中華民國學校建築研究學會，臺北 (2009，12)。