頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 社區節能減碳指標之建立與重要程度評估=Establishment of Indicator Framework and Evaluation of the Importance for Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction in Communities |
---|---|
作 者 | 吳桂陽; 蔡怡婷; | 書刊名 | 健康與建築雜誌 |
卷 期 | 2:1 2015.02[民104.02] |
頁 次 | 頁16-23 |
分類號 | 445.9 |
關鍵詞 | 節能; 減碳; 模糊德爾菲法; Energy saving; Carbon reduction; Fuzzy Delphi method; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 背景:行政院環境保護署資料顯示,台灣溫室氣體排放量從1990年到2006年增加了140%,台灣雖有相關策略及計畫,但對社區卻不一定適用,且無一套完整的減碳因素與成效評估方式,因此建構社區低碳發展指標為目前重要之議題。目的:建立社區節能減碳的因素,並評估其重要程度。方法:本研究藉由相關文獻、案例分析與專家問卷之模糊德爾菲法(Fuzzy Delphi Method)來探討社區居民的環境知識及其推動節能減碳之主要因素。結果:經專家確定推動節能減碳的主要因素構面為:「低碳生活」、「低碳建築」、「環境綠化」、「再生能源」、「綠色運輸」及「經濟社會」,獲得20 項指標,其共識重要程度平均值為7.86,前25%的重要指標及共識值依序為:節約能源(9.41)、資源循環(8.97)、環境教育(8.86)、綠建築技術(8.75)、大眾運輸系統(8.60)。可見社區節能減碳宜先從生活層面著手,以節約能源、資源循環為優先。結論/實務應用:建構社區推動節能減碳之因素,藉此提供政府與社區發展低碳決策之參考。 |
英文摘要 | Background: Based on the data of the Environmental Protection Administration in Taiwan, the amount of greenhouse gas in Taiwan has increased 140% from 1990 to 2006. Although the Taiwan government has related strategies and plans, they may be not suitable communities. Then, it cannot offer a complete assessment way for carbon reducing and effectiveness evaluation, so that it is an important issue to build the lowcarbon development indicators for community development. Purpose: The study tried to build the factors for energy-saving and Carbon reduction in communities, and to evaluate the related weight. Methods: The study tried to discuss the environmental knowledge and main strategies of energy-saving and low-carbon living by using literature review, case studies and the Fuzzy Delphi Method of expert questionnaire. Results: By expert confirm, the main perspectives including "low carbon life", "low carbon building", "environmental afforestation", "renewable energy", "green transportation", and "economic society", and they own 20 indicators. The average consensus importance value was 7.86, and the first 25% indicators and their consensus importance values were following: energy-saving (9.41), resource recycling (8.97), environmental education (8.86), green building technology (8.75), and public transportation (8.60). The result showed the living level is the priority factors to improve the low-carbon policy, and the energy-saving and resources recycling are the first two steps. Conclusion: The study tried to building the factors that community improved the energy-saving and low-carbon projects, and its result referred to the government and communities for future decision-making of low carbon development. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。