行政院環境保護署 環保專案成果報告查詢系統

EPA-97-FA13-03-A142

097

12,800 千元

2008/05/16

2009/04/30

林瑞榕

空保處

柏雪翠

財團法人工業技術研究院

化學物質管理

二氧化碳, 車輛, 管制標準, 測試程序,管制策略

Carbon Dioxide, Automobile, Standard, Test procedure, Strategy

鄧仁鈞

03-5916616

JackRJDeng@itri.org.tw

1.彙整蒐集國外車輛的管制策略與排放數據，了解國外趨勢、技術與法規走向，並參考國外管制架構，考量國情提出汽油汽車二氧化碳排放管理辦法與短中期時程規劃。 2.針對車輛二氧化碳排放影響因子進行研究測試，包括實際道路行駛、空調開啟狀況、不同行車型態、使用低硫油品與E3酒精汽油。由測試結果顯示： （1）行駛於都會區實際道路時，實際排放的CO2會比實驗室FTP行車型態測試值高18%、比實驗室NEDC行車型態測試值低8%；行駛於高速公路實際道路時，實際排放的CO2會比實驗室FTP行車型態測試值高18%；比實驗室NEDC行車型態測試值高0.4%。 （2）在NEDC行車型態下，開啟空調會增加13.6%的平均CO2排放，代表車上使用空調，除加重引擎負載，亦增加燃油消耗，二氧化碳排放量亦會隨之增加。 （3）採用不同行車型態的CO2排放有顯著差異，本計畫實測數值顯示：NEDC行車型態的市區二氧化碳平均排放較FTP-75增加30%、較SC03增加15%；高速部份（SC03無此部份）NEDC較FTP-75 (HWFET) 增加15%。 （4）三種行車型態市區二氧化碳排放之關係式為FTP-75=0.8853×SC03、FTP-75=0.77×NEDC、SC03=0.8698×NEDC；高速部份為FTP-75 (HWFET)=0.8791×NEDC。 3.透過蒐集先進國家運輸部門施行政策與座談會交流，界定溫室氣體減量法(草案)中運輸部門中可行公告管制之範疇，並進行政策可行性評估，與會專家建議車輛的油耗與二氧化碳排放為一體之兩面，管制油耗就等於管制二氧化碳排放，故車輛二氧化碳管制建議應併入現行之耗能標準管制，不宜另訂管制標準。 4.舉辦「2009年車輛二氧化碳防制技術國際研討會」，邀請來自歐洲Mr. Michael Angel、美國Mr. James Michael Lyons及日本Mr. Michinori Hachiya以及我國專家，針對歐盟新車二氧化碳排放標準、歐盟永續運輸發展藍圖、美國聯邦CAFÉ與加州溫室氣體管制標準、美國輕型車溫室氣體減量可行性與成本分析、日本二氧化碳管制策略及環保駕駛推廣狀況等議題，發表專題演講，並分享歐、美、日車輛二氧化碳排放減量策略之執行經驗，可作為我國研訂車輛二氧化碳防制策略之參考。

二氧化碳, 車輛, 管制標準, 測試程序,管制策略

epa-97-fa13-03-a142定稿本全文.pdf

13MB

[期末報告]公開完整版

2009/7/1 上午 12:00:00

1.Collecting the world vehicle GHG control strategies and emissions data, and analyze the global trends of technology developments, framework of control regulations, and considering the current domestic status to plan on short term and medium term vehicle CO2 emission control measures. 2.Study on the condition factors that will affect vehicle CO2 emission which include: real road driving, air conditioning usage, different driving cycles, using low sulfur content, and E3 blend gasoline fuels. Test results were as follows: (1) For urban real road driving, the CO2 emission values was averaged 18% higher than FTP driving cycle’s and 8% lower than NEDC driving cycle’s; For highway real road driving, the averaged CO2 emission values was 18% higher than FTP driving cycle’s and 0.4% higher than NEDC driving cycle’s; (2) For NEDC driving cycle and with air conditioning on, the averaged CO2 emission will be increased by 13.6%. That means if you turn on air conditioning while driving, will put more load on vehicle and also increase the fuel consumption and exhaust CO2 emission; (3) The CO2 emissions were significant different for different driving cycles, the test results have shown that for NEDC driving cycle urban part, the averaged CO2 emission will be 30% higher than FTP-75 city driving cycle’s and 15% higher than SC03 driving cycle’s; For NEDC driving cycle highway part (SC03 is urban driving pattern only), the averaged CO2 emission will be 15% higher than FTP-75 highway (HWFET) driving cycle’s. (4) The CO2 emissions correlations among the previous mentioned urban driving cycles are as follows：FTP-75=0.8853×SC03, FTP-75=0.77×NEDC, and SC03=0.8698×NEDC. For highway driving cycles：FTP-75 highway (HWFET) =0.8791*NEDC. 3.Through collecting the world current implemented policies for transport sector in advanced countries, and holding discussion meetings to define the scope of objects in transport sector that being suitable to promulgate for GHG reduction control and evaluated the viability for different policies. The experts joined the discussion meetings suggested that the vehicle fuel efficiency control has the same effects on CO2 emission control, hence CO2 emission control should be combined into the current fuel economy standards and it is improper to set other additional control measures. 4.Holding the “2009 International Conference on Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Reduction Technologies”. The invited lecturers included Mr. Michael Angel from Europe, Mr. James Michael Lyons from US, Mr. Michinori Hachiya from Japan, and some domestic experts to presenting the topics such as “New CO2 standard for passenger cars in the EU”, “Sustainable Mobility”, “Comparison of U.S. CAFE and California GHG Regulations”, “The Feasibility and Costs of Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from New Light-Duty Vehicles in the U.S.”, “Vehicle CO2 emission reduction strategies in Japan”, “Eco-driving promotion status in Japan”, and to share their experiences with participants on the implementation of CO2 emissions reduction strategies in Europe, US, and Japan. These latest information could be provided as references for the future vehicle CO2 emission control measures setting in Taiwan.

Carbon Dioxide, Automobile, Standard, Test procedure, Strategy