環保專案成果報告查詢系統

專案計畫編號
經費年度	112
計畫經費	4,950 千元
預算科目	空氣品質管理
專案開始日期	2023/07/07
專案結束日期	2024/04/06
專案主持人	蕭旻娟
主辦單位	環境部大氣環境司
承辦人	翁王昌
執行單位	長榮大學
專案分類	大氣空氣
中文關鍵字	空品惡化應變成效推估工具、逸散源降載、固定源減量、前十大源別貢獻程度
英文關鍵字	air quality deterioration emergency response assessment tool, fugitive emission abatement, stationary pollution sources reduction, PM2.5 and O3 contribution among the top-ten sources
協同主持人
共同主持人	賴信志
計畫聯絡人	賴力瑋
計畫聯絡電話	06-2785123#7518
計畫聯絡信箱	liwei@mail.cjcu.edu.tw

中文摘要	本計畫為延續前期計畫之成果，今年度新增各天氣型態之歷史事件日以評估前三十大型固定污染源及逸散污染源應變措施之污染減量效益，希冀其減量效益的結果可供環境部制定相關應變管制措施之參考。根據減量效益之結果發現，針對前三十大型固定污染源即使採取重度嚴重惡化減量25%，在各個天氣型態下，PM2.5日平均濃度差異落在0~1.46μg/m3。至於臭氧小時平均濃度差異則為-1.14~0.15ppb，顯示前三十大型固定污染源之減量效益較小，須與其他行業別（如：紡織業）或源別（如：電廠、移動源及逸散源）共同實施減量降載以改善空氣品質。在逸散污染源的部分，根據應用今年度蒐整之國內外四種應變措施（車行揚塵、營建工地、住宅/商業燃燒及農業燃燒）減量百分比之減量效益結果發現，若實施應變措施於事件日易發生PM2.5橘提以上等級之雲嘉南及高屏地區，在各個天氣型態下，PM2.5日平均濃度差異落在0.21~4.79μg/m3。至於臭氧小時平均濃度差異則為0.03~1ppb，此表示逸散污染源之減量對於PM2.5具有較顯著的改善效益。
中文關鍵字	空品惡化應變成效推估工具、逸散源降載、固定源減量、前十大源別貢獻程度

中文摘要

本計畫為延續前期計畫之成果，今年度新增各天氣型態之歷史事件日以評估前三十大型固定污染源及逸散污染源應變措施之污染減量效益，希冀其減量效益的結果可供環境部制定相關應變管制措施之參考。根據減量效益之結果發現，針對前三十大型固定污染源即使採取重度嚴重惡化減量25%，在各個天氣型態下，PM2.5日平均濃度差異落在0~1.46μg/m3。至於臭氧小時平均濃度差異則為-1.14~0.15ppb，顯示前三十大型固定污染源之減量效益較小，須與其他行業別（如：紡織業）或源別（如：電廠、移動源及逸散源）共同實施減量降載以改善空氣品質。在逸散污染源的部分，根據應用今年度蒐整之國內外四種應變措施（車行揚塵、營建工地、住宅/商業燃燒及農業燃燒）減量百分比之減量效益結果發現，若實施應變措施於事件日易發生PM2.5橘提以上等級之雲嘉南及高屏地區，在各個天氣型態下，PM2.5日平均濃度差異落在0.21~4.79μg/m3。至於臭氧小時平均濃度差異則為0.03~1ppb，此表示逸散污染源之減量對於PM2.5具有較顯著的改善效益。

中文關鍵字

空品惡化應變成效推估工具、逸散源降載、固定源減量、前十大源別貢獻程度

類型	檔名	檔案大小	說明	最新版公開日期
期末報告	期末成果報告(定稿公開)_0531.pdf	27MB	期末報告	2024/7/27 上午 12:00:00

摘要	This project builds upon the achievements of previous initiatives. This year, historical event days for various weather patterns have been added to assess the pollution reduction benefits of contingency measures for the top thirty major stationary pollution sources and fugitive pollution sources. The aim is for the results of these reduction benefits to serve as a reference for the Ministry of Environment in formulating relevant contingency control measures. According to the results of the reduction benefits, even with a severe reduction of 25% in emissions from the top thirty major stationary pollution sources, the differences in daily average PM2.5 concentrations range from 0 to 0.41 μg/m3 across all weather patterns. As for differences in hourly average ozone concentrations, they range from -1.14 to 0.15 ppb, indicating relatively small reduction benefits from the top thirty major fixed pollution sources. Collaborative reduction measures with other industries (such as the textile industry) or source categories (such as power plants, mobile sources, and fugitive sources) are necessary to improve air quality. In terms of fugitive pollution sources, based on the application of this year's compilation of four types of domestic and foreign contingency measures (vehicle dust, construction sites, residential/commercial burning, and agricultural burning), percentage reductions in emissions were calculated. The results show that if contingency measures are implemented on days prone to PM2.5 exceeding the orange alert level in the Yunlin-Chiayi-Tainan and Kaohsiung-Pingtung regions, the differences in daily average PM2.5 concentrations range from 0.12 to 4.79 μg/m3 across all weather patterns. As for differences in hourly average ozone concentrations, they range from 0.03 to 1 ppb. This indicates that the reduction of fugitive pollution sources has a significant improvement effect on PM2.5.
英文關鍵字	air quality deterioration emergency response assessment tool, fugitive emission abatement, stationary pollution sources reduction, PM2.5 and O3 contribution among the top-ten sources

摘要

This project builds upon the achievements of previous initiatives. This year, historical event days for various weather patterns have been added to assess the pollution reduction benefits of contingency measures for the top thirty major stationary pollution sources and fugitive pollution sources. The aim is for the results of these reduction benefits to serve as a reference for the Ministry of Environment in formulating relevant contingency control measures. According to the results of the reduction benefits, even with a severe reduction of 25% in emissions from the top thirty major stationary pollution sources, the differences in daily average PM2.5 concentrations range from 0 to 0.41 μg/m3 across all weather patterns. As for differences in hourly average ozone concentrations, they range from -1.14 to 0.15 ppb, indicating relatively small reduction benefits from the top thirty major fixed pollution sources. Collaborative reduction measures with other industries (such as the textile industry) or source categories (such as power plants, mobile sources, and fugitive sources) are necessary to improve air quality. In terms of fugitive pollution sources, based on the application of this year's compilation of four types of domestic and foreign contingency measures (vehicle dust, construction sites, residential/commercial burning, and agricultural burning), percentage reductions in emissions were calculated. The results show that if contingency measures are implemented on days prone to PM2.5 exceeding the orange alert level in the Yunlin-Chiayi-Tainan and Kaohsiung-Pingtung regions, the differences in daily average PM2.5 concentrations range from 0.12 to 4.79 μg/m3 across all weather patterns. As for differences in hourly average ozone concentrations, they range from 0.03 to 1 ppb. This indicates that the reduction of fugitive pollution sources has a significant improvement effect on PM2.5.

英文關鍵字

air quality deterioration emergency response assessment tool, fugitive emission abatement, stationary pollution sources reduction, PM2.5 and O3 contribution among the top-ten sources