空污費政策與排放交易制度合併推行之可行性評估：以氮氧化物為例

Abstract

為進一步達成空氣品質目標，環保署於民國86年修正之空氣污染防制法中開始納入總量管制精神，亦積極於民國92年1月開始於高屏地區實施。然而我國之空污費徵收制度已行之有年，已被廠商普遍接受應不宜輕言放棄，而依照目前政府空污費政策加總量管制之規劃方式，又有雙頭馬車之疑慮。因此本研究之目的為整合空污費與排放交易制度，以一個非以總量管制目標為導向之實施方案，來提供我國未來環保施政方向之參考。 本研究係以氮氧化物(NOX)為例，針對空污費徵收制度、排放交易制度與兩制度並行之不同政策工具進行評估比較，利用線性規劃的觀念計算總量管制模式所需花費平均成本，並分別比較執行各政策政府之收支情形、業者負擔成本與區域總削減量，藉此比較不同政策之優缺點以探討排放交易制度與空污費制度合併推行之經濟可行性。 研究結果顯示，結合空污費與排放交易政策之污染減量較個別政策執行之減量效果佳，且對廠商成本衝擊較小，並可減少總量管制初期執行之困難，政府收入雖較空污費制度少，但較排放交易制度為多，仍有足夠的經費供合理的運用；因此合併推行排放交易制度與空污費制度應為未來可行之政策思考方向。

This study proposes a policy instrument that combining air pollution fee with emissions trading system, and analyses the benefits and costs by comparing this implementation regime to air pollution fee policy and the emissions trading system. Nitrous oxide (NOX) is taken for example and the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) devices will be chosen by emission sources as air pollution control devices. Using linear programming model as the method to estimate the costs and the amounts of NOX reduction performance by each policy instruments. The result shows that the combining system and the emissions trading system both have flexibility, cost minimization, and most reductions than only put air pollution fee policy. Still it is indicated that combining system is more uncomplicated in practice than only use of emissions trading at the early stage. Although combining fee with emissions trading system will practice less revenue than air pollution fee policy, it still has funds for operation in comparison with emissions trading system. Furthermore utilization of changing air pollution fee rate could achieve the objective amounts of reduction that expected. It is included that the combining policy instrument is feasible to apply in the future.