臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著國民經濟的發展和生活水準的提高，垃圾之妥善處理已成為環保的重要課題。迄今，處理垃圾的方法不外乎掩埋、焚化和回收再利用。目前政府將垃圾處理的重心放在焚化處理，以台灣而言，確實沒有太多的土地可供建置所謂的衛生掩埋場。而台灣的生活形態已經轉型，再加上垃圾的型態轉趨多樣化，使用堆肥化處理垃圾實屬有限。
垃圾焚化廠為了維持焚化爐的商業運轉及配合政府政策，須有足夠的垃圾量維持運轉及汽電共生廠的發電效能來維持營運。
這篇研究主要是針對民國92 年到民國101 年台灣大型焚化廠中24家廠商為主要樣本，找出各家焚化廠之發電無效率值。結果顯示，此十年間台灣焚化廠之發電無效率值隨著時間下降，表示發電效率有隨時間進步；而總平均無效率值約為22.8%，顯示在既有的投入情況下，台灣焚化廠仍有22.8%的提升空間；各廠發電無效率值的估計結果，以高雄縣仁武廠發電無效率值0.113 為最小值，屬相對效率最高者；而進行各體制間之比較後發現，公有公營體制除高雄市南區外，民營體制普遍較公營體制效率為高，又民營體制中，以地區而言，北部地區之效率是較優於中部及南部地區，以各廠而言，則高雄縣仁武廠、宜蘭縣利澤廠、台北縣新店廠及嘉義市廠為相對效率較高者。
環保政策的推行，造成區域垃圾不能滿足設計的焚化量，必須靠一般事業廢棄物來維持運轉，造成了垃圾熱值的不穩定及偏高的現象，增加操作的困難度，也對焚化爐造成嚴重的損耗，增加維護成本的支出。公有公營的焚化廠，運轉效

率低主要來自管理的不彰，應開放民間投資與營運，以民營的專業人才投入操作營運，以提升焚化廠之營運效率，避免財政問題。

As economic developments and advance of the living standard, waste management becomes an important topic for environmental protection. So far, garbage disposal methods are mainly landfill, incineration, and resource recycle. In Taiwan, incineration is the main direction for current waste management policy due to not large enough geography area for constructing more sanitary landfills. In the meantime, transformation of Taiwan life style diverse disposals; hence, landfill method in Taiwan is foreseen its limitations.
In order to operate profitably as well as comply government policy, Municipal Waste Incinerations (MWI) require sufficient disposals and co-generation power plant to maintain profitable operations.
The purpose of this research is to analyze 24 incinerators between 2003 to 2012 and identify average value of electricity-generated inefficiency. The result implies that electricity-generated inefficiency for Taiwan incinerators decrease average 22.8% through time-being, which means the improvements of electricity production during this decade. The study also determines 0.113 as the minimum inefficiency value presented by Kaohsiung County Renwu Incineration plant, that implies higher efficiency. Additionally, the study also found that northern private-owned plants operate more efficiently than public-owned plants. Besides to Kaohsiung County Renwu incineration plant, a public-owned plants, Yilan County Letzer refuse incineration plant, New Taipei City Hsintien refuse incineration plant, and Chiayi City refuse incineration plant are relatively identified as higher efficiency private-owned plants.
To comply with environmental protection policy, waste incinerators now require more general wastes to fulfill capacity and achieve certain profits. However, general wastes cause unstable effects for incinerators and operational difficulties, which is foreseen to damage incinerators as well as increase the maintenance costs. Suggest public-owned incinerators to recruit management professionals to increase operational efficiency and prevent financial deficits.

目錄
摘要 i
誌謝 v
目錄 vi
表目錄 ix
圖目錄 x
第一章 前言 1
1.1 研究緣起 1
1.2 研究目的 3
1.3 研究內容 4
第二章 文獻回顧 6
2.1 焚化理論背景概述 6
2.1.1 處理單位垃圾量所需熱量 6
2.1.2 燃燒產生熱量與發電的效率 6
2.2 台灣地區焚化爐現狀 9
2.2.1 台灣地區焚化廠概況 9
2.2.2 台灣地區焚化廠營運狀況 12
2.2.3 台灣地區垃圾焚化廠發電狀況 12
2.2.4 焚化廠的整體性分佈 22
2.3 台灣地區各縣市之垃圾型態 54
2.4 影響發電效率的因子 56
2.5 日本與歐美發達國家之經驗 61
2.5.1 日本之經驗 61
2.5.2 歐美重視回收再利用 62
第三章 研究方法 64
3.1 研究架構 64
3.2 資料包絡分析法 65
3.2.1 資料包絡分析法之理論 65
3.2.2 資料包絡法之分析方法 66
3.2.3 資料包絡分析法之特性及限制 66
3.3 垃圾焚化廠及投入產出構面 68
3.3.1 垃圾焚化廠基本資料 68
3.3.2 投入產出面 70
第四章 結果與討論 71
4.1 各垃圾焚化廠整體運營描析 71
4.1.1 垃圾分化情況 71
4.1.2 垃圾處理率 75
4.1.3 運轉率 85
4.1.4 本節研究結論 103
4.2 焚化廠發電效率之分析 104
4.2.1 焚化廠發電整體狀況 104
4.2.2 效率分析 118
4.2.3 發電效率 121
4.3 焚化廠差額變數分析 127
4.4 焚化廠敏感度分析 129
4.5 提升資源回收效率之可行措施 131
4.5.1 加強宣導工作，提高民眾配合度 131
4.5.2 建立資源回收點 132
4.5.3 加強區域內之「點、線、面」全面性回收工作 133
第五章 結論與建議 135
5.1 結論 135
5.2 研究建議 136
參考文獻 137


表目錄
表2-1台灣地區焚化廠營運狀況 14
表2-2 2001-2012年24家焚化廠售電所得表 17
表2-3 現代垃圾焚燒發電廠與現代火電廠能源轉換的比較 56
表3-1 效率評估方法比較表 67
表3-2 垃圾焚化廠基本情況表 68
表4-1 公有民營、公有公營以及私有私營垃圾處理率分析表 76
表4-2 垃圾性質 2011年全年度統計報表 77
表4-3 2012年執行機關垃圾清理概況統計報表 80
表4-4 公有民營、公有公營以及私有私營運轉率分析表 86
表4-5 2001-2012年24家焚化廠售電量表 101
表4-6 2001-2012年24家焚化廠售電所得表 106
表4-7 2012年台灣地區焚化廠運營效率情況表 110
表4-8 2001-2012年24家焚化廠售電率 114
表4-9 垃圾焚化廠各項投入產出項指標 118
表4-10 垃圾分化廠之效率分析 120
表4-11 2010-2011年各廠發電效率 123
表4-12 2010-2012年發電效率 124
表4-13 發電效率比較表 126
表4-14 日本、台灣、韓國、香港發電效率比較表 126
表4-15 垃圾焚化廠之差額變數分析 128
圖目錄
圖2-1 89-100年台灣地區垃圾生產量 10
圖2-2 89-100年台灣地區垃圾焚化量 11
圖2-3 焚化廠分佈情況圖 23
圖2-4基隆市天外天垃圾資源回收(焚化)廠流程圖 25
圖2-5 桃園縣BOO垃圾焚化廠流程圖 27
圖2-6苗栗縣垃圾焚化廠流程圖 28
圖2-7台中市烏日資源回收廠流程圖 30
圖2-8 台北市內湖垃圾焚化廠流程圖 32
圖2-9 台北市北投垃圾焚化廠流程圖 34
圖2-10 台北市木柵垃圾焚化廠流程圖 36
圖2-11 新北市新店焚化廠焚化流程 37
圖2-12新北市樹林焚化廠焚化流程 39
圖2-13 新北市八里焚化廠焚化流程 41
圖2-14 宜蘭縣利澤垃圾資源回收(焚化)廠流程 43
圖2-15 新竹市垃圾資源回收廠流程 45
圖2-16 台中市垃圾焚化廠流程 46
圖2-17 台中市后里資源回收廠流程 48
圖2-18 彰化縣溪州垃圾焚化廠流程 50
圖2-19 嘉義市垃圾焚化廠流程 52
圖2-20 嘉義縣鹿草垃圾焚化廠流程 54
圖3-1 研究架構 64
圖4-1 一般垃圾與一般事業廢棄物進焚化廠趨勢 72
圖4-2民國96~101年垃圾處理趨勢 73
圖4-3 2001-2012年一般廢棄物處理趨勢 74
圖4-4 2001-2012年垃圾進廠量趨勢 74
圖4-5 2001-2012年焚化處理量趨勢 74
圖4-6 2001-2012年發電量量趨勢 100
圖4-7 2001-2012年售電量量趨勢 100
圖4-8 2001-2012年售電所得趨勢 105
圖4-9 2001-2012年售電率趨勢 113
圖4-10 資源回收四合一制度運作機制 134

1.富聯工程顧問有限公司，2006，「台北市垃圾焚化廠未來停爐、停廠、關廠之可行性規劃評估計畫期末報告」，台北市環境保護局。
2.中興工程顧問股份有限公司，2008，「垃圾焚化廠經營管理及查核評鑑相關工作執行計畫」，行政院環境保護署。
3.中興工程顧問股份有限公司，2009，「垃圾焚化廠轉型生質能源中心可行性評估規劃專案工作計畫」，行政院環境保護署。
4.陳秋楊，2008，『固體廢棄物管理』，東南科技大學，台北縣。
5.劉育佑，2009，「都市生活垃圾蒸煮熱處理之評估研究」，國立中正大學機械工程研究所碩士論文，嘉義縣。
6.姜智文，2009，「農業剩餘資材生質化之研究」，國立中正大學機械工程研究所碩士論文，嘉義縣。
7.中興工程顧問股份有限公司，2009，「97年度垃圾焚化廠經營管理及查核評鑑相關工作執行計畫」，行政院環境保護署。
8.台北市環境保護局，2010，「內湖垃圾焚化廠98年度營運成果報告書」。
9.中興工程顧問股份有限公司，2010，「高效能生質氣化試驗設施建造評估規劃計畫」，行政院環境保護署。
10.洪文宗，2009，赴歐美考察「生質廢棄物高效能前處理及氣化技術與設施」心得報告，環境檢驗電子報第十五期，行政院環境保護署環境檢驗所。
11.中華民國環境保護統計年報，2009，行政院環境保護署。
12.萬皓鵬、李宏台，2010，「廢棄物衍生燃料的使用」，『科學發展月刊』，34-43，行政院國家科學委員會。
13.蘇意筠，2009，赴日考察「垃圾焚化廠屆齡評估作業及後續規劃研習計畫」心得報告，行政院環境保護署。
14.內政部營建署，2009，「污水下水道系統建設情形統計分析」。(sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/topic/污水下水道分析.doc)
15.江慶輝，2003，「公有公營焚化廠委託民營之可行性探討與制度設計--以北投焚化廠為例」，國立台北大學資源管理研究所碩士論文，台北市。
16.謝銘和，2003，「台北市都市垃圾處理處置規劃之探討」，國立台北大學資源管理研究所碩士論文，台北市。
17.張明益，2003，「垃圾衍生燃料廠之環境與經濟效益分析」，國立台灣大學環境工程學研究所碩士論文，台北市。
18.黃雯婷，2005，「都會區家戶垃圾委外清運模式設計」，國立台北大學資源管理研究所碩士論文，台北市。
19.洪旭泰，2007，「BOO/BOT垃圾焚化廠的成本分析及政策檢討」，國立台北大學資源管理研究所碩士論文，台北市。
20.Bergman Patrick .C.A. and Kiel Jacob H.A.,Oct 2005,」Torrefaction for biomass upgrading」, Published at 14th European Biomass on ference & Exhibition,Paris,France,17-21
21.Fan Liangshih, Li Fanxing, Ramkumar Shwetha, 2008,」Utilization of chemical Looping strategy in coal gasification processes」, Science Direct, Particuology 131-142.
22.Freeman R.Edward, 2004,」The Stakeholder Approach Revisited 」,Journal for Business,Economics & Ethics (zfwu)5/3 228-241 (http://www.zfwu.de/fileadmin/pdf/3_2004/Freeman_HansenBodeMossmeyer.pdf)
23.「Mechanical Heat Treatment of Municipal Solid Waste」，2007，defra(Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs),uk
(http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/residual/newtech/documents/mht.pdf)
24.Bergman P.C.A. et al., July 2005,」Torrefaction for biomass co-firing in existing coal-fired power stations 「BIOCOAL」,pp.14-15
25.Kiel J.H.A. et al., May 2009,「Presented at 4th International Conference on Clean Coal Technologies in conjunction with the 3rd International Freiberg Conference on IGCC & XtL Technologies」，Dresden 18-21 May 2009
26.Agrell, P., Bogetoft, P., Tind, J., 2003. DEA and dynamic yardstick competition in Scandinavian electricity distribution, Department of Economics, The Royal Agricultural Economics, Copenhagen.
27.Atkinson, S., Halvorsen, R., 1986. The relative efficiency of public and private firms in a regulated environment: the case of US electric utilities. J. Public Econ. 29, 281-294.
28.Aw, B. Y. and Batra, G. (1998) "Technological Capability and Firm Efficiency in Taiwan." The World Bank Economic Review, 12, 59-79.
29.Banker, R.D., Morey, R.C., 1986. The use of categorical variables in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science 32, 1613–1627.
30.Bauer, P.W., Berger, A.N., Ferrier, G.D., Humphrey, D.B., 1998. Consistency conditions for regulatory analysis of financial institutions: A comparison of frontier methods. Journal of Economics and Business 50, 85–114.
31.Berger, A.N., Mester, L.J., 1997. Inside the black box: What explains differences in efficiency of financial institutions? Journal of Banking and Finance 21 (7), 895–947.
32.Boycko, M., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R., 1996a. A theory of privatization. Econ. J. 106, 309–319.
33.Boycko, M., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R., 1996b. Second-best economic policy for a divided government. Eur. Econ. Rev. 40, 767–774.
34.Brown, R.L., Brown, R.M., O_Connor, I.P., 1999. Efficiency, bond of association and exit patterns in credit unions: Australian evidence. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 70, 5–23.
35.Brown, R., (2006). Mismanagement or mismeasurement? Pitfalls and protocols for DEA studies in the financial services sector, European Journal of Operational Research 174, 1100–1116.
36.Coelli, T., 1996a. Measurement and Sources of Technical Inefficiency in Australian Coal-fired Electricity Generation. Centre for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis, University of New England, Armidale.
37.Coelli, T., Rao, D.S.P., Battese, G.E., 1998. An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
38.Cook,W.D.,Chai, D.,Doyle, J., Green,R., 1998. Hierarchies and groups in DEA. Journal of Productivity Analysis 10, 177–198.
39.Cornelli, F., Li, D.D., 1997. Large shareholders, private benefits of control, and optimal schemes of privatization. Rand J. Econ. 28, 585–604.
40.Dalmau-Matarrodona, E., Puig-Junoy, J., 1998. Market structure and hospital efficiency: evaluating potential effects of deregulation in a national health service. Rev. Indust. Org. 13, 447-466.
41.Dyson, R.G., Allen, R., Camanho, A.S., Podinovski, V.V., Sarrico, C.S., Shale, E.A., 2001.
42.Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research 132, 245–259.
43.Errunza, Vihang R. and Mazumdar, Sumon C., Privatization: a theoretical framework. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money 11 (2001) 339–362.
44.Eyyuboglu, E.M., (2006) Effects of privatization: A case study from Cayirhan coal district, Turkey, Energy Policy 34, 3017–3026.
45.Førsund, F., Kittelsen, S., 1998. Productivity development of Norwegian electricity
distribution utilities. Resources and Energy Economics 20, 207– 224.
46.Fried, H.O., Lovell, C.A.K., Schmidt, S.S., Yaisawarng, S., 2002. Accounting for environmental effects and statistical noise in Data Envelopment Analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis 17, 157–174.
47.Galal, A., Jones, L., Tandon, P., Vogelsang, I., 1992. Welfare Consequences of Selling Public Enterprises, The World Bank, Washington, DC.
48.Garcia, A., Arbelaez, L., 2002. Market power analysis for the Colombian electricity market. Energy Economics 24, 217–229.
49.Green, W., 1980. Maximum likelihood estimation of econometric frontier functions. Journal of Econometrics 13, 27– 56.
50.Hart, O., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R.W., 1997. The proper scope of government: theory and an application to prisons. Q. J. Econ. 112, 1127–1161.
51.Hjalmarsson, L., Veiderpass, A., 1992. Productivity in Swedish electricity retail distribution. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 94, 193– 205.
52.Jin, Dal Yong, Political and economic processes in the privatization of the Korea
telecommunications industry: A case study of Korea Telecom, 1987–2003, Telecommunications Policy 30 (2006) 3–13.
53.Katz, B.G., Owen, J., 1993. Privatization: choosing the optimal time path. J. Comp. Econ. 17, 715–736.
54.Katz, B.G., Owen, J., 1995. Designing the optimal privatization plan for restructuring firms and industries in transition. J. Comp. Econ. 21, 1–28.
55.Kay, J., Thompson, D., 1986. Privatization: a policy in search of a rationale. Econ. J. 96, 18–38.
56.Marin-Galiano, M., and Kunert, J., (2006). Comparison of ANOVA with the Tobit model for analysing sensory data, Food Quality and Preference 17, 209–218.
57.McKillop, D., Glass, J., Ferguson, C., 2002. Investigating the cost performance of UK credit unions using radial and nonradial efficiency measures. Journal of Banking and Finance 26 (8), 1563–1591.
58.Megginson, W., Nash, R., Van-Randenborgh, M., 1994. The financial and operating
performance of newly privatized firms: an international empirical analysis. The Journal of Finance 49, 403– 451.
59.Megginson, W.L., Netter, J.M., 2001. From state to market: a survey of empirical studies on privatization. Journal of Economic Literature 39, 321– 389.
60.Miliotis, P., 1992. Data envelopment analysis applied to electricity distribution districts. Journal of Operational Research Society 43, 549–555.
61.Nelson, A., 1990. The effects of competition on publicly-owned firms. evidence from the municipal electric industry in the US. Int. J. Indust. Org. 8, 37-51.
62.Pollit, M., 1995. Ownership and Performance in Electric Utilities: The International Evidence on Privatization and Efficiency. Oxford University Press.
63.Pollitt, M., 1996. Ownership and efficiency in nuclear power production. Oxford Econ. Papers 48, 342-360.
64.Pombo, C., Ramı´rez, M, 2005. Privatization in Colombia: a plant performance analysis. In: Chong A., Lopes-de-Silanes, F. (Eds) Privatization in Latin America: Myths and Reality—World Bank–Stanford University Press–Inter American Development Bank.
65.Pombo, C., and Taborda, R., Performance and efficiency in Colombia’s power distribution system: Effects of the 1994 reform Energy Economics 28 (2006) 339–369.
66.Puig-Junoy, J. (2001) "Technical Inefficiency and Public Capital in US states: A Stochastic Frontier Approach." Journal of Regional Science, 41, 75-96.
67.Raczka, J., 2001. Explaining the performance of heat plants in Poland, Energy Economics 23, 355-370.
68.Ramaswamy, K., Glinow, M.A.V., 2000. Organizational performance following changes in ownership: modelling post-privatization outcomes. Strategic Change 9, 297–310.
69.Ruggiero, J. (1999) "Efficiency Estimation and Error Decomposition in the Stochastic
70.Frontier Model: A Monte Carlo Analysis." European Journal of Operational Research, 115, 555-563.
71.Sappington, D.E., Stiglitz, J.E., 1987. Privatization, information and incentives. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management 6 (4), 567–582.
72.Shapiro, C., Willig, R.D., 1990. Economic rationales for the scope of privatization. In: Suleiman, E.N., Waterbury, J. (Eds.), The Political Economy of Public Sector Reform and Privatization. Westview Press, Boulder CO.
73.Sheshinski, E., Cavla, L.F.L., 2003. Privatization and its benefits: theory and evidence. CESifo Economic Studies 49 (3), 429–459.
74.Shleifer, A., Vishny, R.W., 1994. Politicians and firms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 109 (4), 995–1025.
75.Sotnikov, S., 1998. Evaluating the effects of price and trade liberalization on the technical efficiency of agricultural production in a transition economy: the case of Russia. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 25, 412-431.
76.Staat, M., 2001. The effect of sample size on the mean efficiency in DEA: Comment. Journal of Productivity Analysis 15, 129–137.
77.Thanassoulis, E., 2001. Introduction to the Theory and Application of Data Envelopment Analysis. Kluwer Academic Press.
78.Vaninsky, A., 2006. Efficiency of electric power generation in the United States: Analysis and forecast based on data envelopment analysis, Energy Economics 28 (2006) 326–338.
79.Vining, A.R., Boardman, A.E., 1992. Ownership versus competition: efficiency in public enterprise. Public Choice 73, 205–239.
80.Worthington, A.C., 2000. Cost efficiency in Australian nonblank financial institutions: A non-parametric approach. Accounting and Finance 40, 75–97.
81.Worthington, A.C., 2001. Efficiency in pre-merger and postmerger non-bank financial institutions. Managerial and Decision Economics 22, 439–452.
82.Wortzel, H., Wortzel, L., 1989. Privatization: not the only answer. World Dev. 633–641.
83.Xu, X. And S. R. Jeffrey (1998) "Efficiency and Technical Progress in Traditional and Modern Agriculture: Evidence from Rice Production in China." Agricultural Economics, 18, 157-165.
84.Yarrow, G., 1999. A theory of privatization, or why bureaucrats are still in business. World Development 27 (1), 157–168.
85.Zhang, Y., Bartels, R., 1998. The effect of sample size on the mean efficiency in DEA with an application to electricity distribution in Australia, Sweden and New Zealand. Journal of Productivity Analysis 9, 187–204.