Innovative Promotion of Renewable Energy Development for Challenging Sustainable Low-Carbon Society: Case Study of Pingtung County, Taiwan
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Central Regulations and Economic Measures for Promoting Renewable Energy in Taiwan
RE Category | Type | Scale (kW) | FIT (USD/kW-h) b | |
---|---|---|---|---|
2013 | 2014 | |||
Photovoltaic power | Roof | 1–10 | 0.285 (0.277) | 0.243 |
10–100 | 0.256 (0.248) | 0.218 | ||
100–500 | 0.241 (0.234) | 0.205 | ||
≥500 | 0.215 (0.203) | 0.177 | ||
Surface | ≥1 | 0.203 (0.191) | 0.167 | |
Wind power | On-shore | 1–10 | 0.249 | 0.277 |
≥10 | 0.089 | 0.089 | ||
Off-shore | -- | -- | 0.190 | |
Biomass-to-power | Non-anaerobic facility | -- | 0.084 | 0.085 |
Anaerobic facility | -- | 0.095 | 0.110 | |
Waste-to-energy | -- | -- | 0.096 | 0.096 |
3. Innovative Promotion and Measures for Renewable Energy
3.1. Photovoltaic System in the Aquaculture Industry
3.2. Other Innovation Promotion and Measures for Renewable Energy
4. Biogas-to-electricity Potential and Its Benefit Analysis in Pingtung County
Year | No. of Swine Farm | Head on Swine Farm | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Taiwan | Pingtung County | Taiwan | Pingtung County | |
2008 | 10,992 | 2,640 | 6,427,597 | 1,568,194 |
2009 | 10,423 | 2,441 | 6,130,003 | 1,408,826 |
2010 | 10,076 | 2,304 | 6,185,952 | 1,455,623 |
2011 | 9,733 | 2,233 | 6,265,546 | 1,500,948 |
2012 | 9,273 | 2,108 | 6,008,317 | 1,458,778 |
Scale (Head) | No. of Swine Farm | Head on Swine Farm | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
No. | Percentage (%) | Head | Percentage (%) | |
1~19 | 334 | 15.84 | 2,501 | 0.17 |
20~99 | 385 | 18.26 | 20,746 | 1.42 |
100~199 | 281 | 13.33 | 39,993 | 2.74 |
200~299 | 154 | 7.31 | 36,830 | 2.52 |
300~499 | 218 | 10.34 | 85,832 | 5.88 |
500~999 | 353 | 16.75 | 260,899 | 17.88 |
1,000~1,999 | 288 | 13.66 | 397,513 | 27.25 |
2,000~2,999 | 40 | 1.90 | 93,818 | 6.43 |
3,000~4,999 | 19 | 0.90 | 77,731 | 5.33 |
5,000~9,999 | 21 | 1.00 | 143,657 | 9.85 |
10,000~19,999 | 7 | 0.33 | 105,421 | 7.23 |
20,000 | 8 | 0.38 | 193,837 | 13.29 |
Total | 2,108 | 100.00 | 1,458,778 | 100.00 |
- Swine population in the farm scale of over 5,000 heads: around 443,000 heads, seen in Table 2.
- Methane emission factor: 5 kg CH4·head−1·year−1 (equivalent to 11.75 m3 biogas head−1·year−1 based on methane concentration of 65 % in biogas), seen in Table 3.
- Electricity generation factor: 0.626 m3 biogas per kW-h (based on 5,500 kcal·m−3 heating value, 25 % energy efficiency) [15].
- Electricity purchase charge (FIT): 0.10 USD per kW-h, seen in Table 1.
- Global warming potential for methane: 23 (100-year time horizon) [14].
- (1)
- Quantitative benefits
- Methane reduction: 2.2 Gg·year−1.
- Electricity generation: 8.3 × 106 kW-h·year−1.
- Equivalent electricity charge saving: 8.3 × 105 USD·year−1.
- Equivalent carbon dioxide mitigation: 50.9 Gg·year−1.
- (2)
- Qualitative benefits
- To coordinate with energy policy: promotion of diversification of primary energy, and fulfillment of energy-related technology development.
- To upgrade environmental and living quality: reduction of odorants (i.e., NH3, H2S), mitigation of VOCs hazards, and prevention of gas (i.e., CH4) explosions and fires.
- To enhance swine farmer’s income: reduction in operation cost, and gain from additional electricity generation by the government revenues (i.e., FIT).
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
- Build large-scale centralized manure (and other co-fermented residues like kitchen waste) treatment plant to demonstrate the production of biogas efficiently and economically.
- Provide subsidies to install biogas-to-power systems in the livestock industry under the support of special funds (e.g, “Agricultural Development Fund”) and also increase the preferential electricity purchase charge (i.e., FIT) to encourage the biomass energy promotion.
- Demonstrate new biogas-cleaning-power technologies (including, wastewater treatment system for biogas production and cleaning, and micro-turbine for power generation) that appeared on the market for the purpose of broadening a wide variety of applications to swine-raised farms.
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zaman, A.U.; Lehmann, S. Challenges and opportunities in transforming a city into a “zero waste city”. Challenges 2011, 2, 73–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hammer, S.A. Renewable Energy Policymaking in New York and London: Lessons for Other “World Cities”? In Urban Energy Transform: From Fossil Fuels to Renewable Power; Droege, P., Ed.; Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2008; pp. 143–172. [Google Scholar]
- Spath, P.; Rohracher, H. The “Eco-cities” Freiburg and Graz: The Social Dynamics of Pioneering Urban Energy and Climate Governance. In Cities and Low Carbon Transitions; Bulkeley, H., Broto, V.C., Hodson, M., Marvin, S., Eds.; Routledge: Oxford, UK, 2011; pp. 88–106. [Google Scholar]
- Vandevyvere, H.; Stremke, S. Urban planning for a renewable energy future: Methodological challenges and opportunities for a design perspective. Sustainability 2012, 4, 1309–1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martensson, K.; Westerberg, K. How to transform local energy systems towards bioenergy? Three strategy models for transformation. Energ. Policy 2007, 35, 6095–6105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IBM Smarter Cities Challenge. Available online: https://smartercitieschallenge.org/about.html (accessed on 9 August 2013).
- 2011 Energy Statistical Data Book; Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA): Taipei, Taiwan, 2012.
- Bureau of Energy, Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA, Taiwan). Energy Statistics. Available online: http://web3.moeaboe.gov.tw/ECW/english/content/SubMenu.aspx?menu_id=979 (accessed on 9 December 2013).
- Wang, M.W.; Cheng, Y.J. The evolution of feed-in tariff policy in Taiwan. Energ. Strategy Rev. 2012, 1, 130–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tansel, B.; Varala, P.K.; Londono, V. Solar energy harvesting at closed landfills: Energy yield and wind loads on solar panels on top and side slopes. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2013, 8, 42–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsai, W.T.; Lin, C.I. Overview analysis of bioenergy from livestock manure management in Taiwan. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009, 13, 2682–2688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Statistics on Livestock/Poultry Industry in Taiwan; Council of Agriculture (COA): Taipei, Taiwan, 2013.
- Su, J.J.; Liu, B.Y.; Chang, Y.C. Emission of greenhouse gas from livestock waste and wastewater treatment in Taiwan. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 2003, 95, 253–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gases Inventories; International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Paris, France, 2006.
- Tsai, W.T.; Chou, Y.H. Progress in energy utilization from agrowastes in Taiwan. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004, 8, 461–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
Share and Cite
Tsai, W.-T. Innovative Promotion of Renewable Energy Development for Challenging Sustainable Low-Carbon Society: Case Study of Pingtung County, Taiwan. Challenges 2014, 5, 26-34. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe5010026
Tsai W-T. Innovative Promotion of Renewable Energy Development for Challenging Sustainable Low-Carbon Society: Case Study of Pingtung County, Taiwan. Challenges. 2014; 5(1):26-34. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe5010026
Chicago/Turabian StyleTsai, Wen-Tien. 2014. "Innovative Promotion of Renewable Energy Development for Challenging Sustainable Low-Carbon Society: Case Study of Pingtung County, Taiwan" Challenges 5, no. 1: 26-34. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe5010026
APA StyleTsai, W. -T. (2014). Innovative Promotion of Renewable Energy Development for Challenging Sustainable Low-Carbon Society: Case Study of Pingtung County, Taiwan. Challenges, 5(1), 26-34. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe5010026