Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/5691
標題: 自來水配水管網合理漏水量之研究
Study on the Economic Level of Leakage in Distribution Network for Water Supply
作者: 高千惠
Kao, Chien-Hui
關鍵字: economic level of leakage
合理漏水量
level of leakage
least cost
marginal cost
environmental and social costs and benefits
tradable leakage permit
漏水率
最小成本法
邊際成本法
環境與社會之成本及效益
可交易之漏水許可證
出版社: 環境工程學系所
引用: 駱尚廉、楊萬發編著,環境工程(一)自來水工程,茂昌圖書有限公司,2005年9月二版二印。 黃正賢著,給水工程,高立圖書有限公司,2008年1月10日三版修訂。 台灣自來水公司,降低漏水率實施計畫—試辦小區管網計畫成果報告,2007年1月。 巨廷工程顧問股份有限公司、株式會社東京設計事務所,臺北自來水供水管網改善計畫,期末簡報,2004年11月15日。 經濟部水利署,自來水漏水對策期末報告書,2006年11月。 經濟部水利署,我國自來水漏水改善對策期末報告書,2006年11月。 周國鼎,最小分區計量管網規模之探討,2008水利產業研討會論文集,2008年11月,第A44-A54頁。 廖宗盛,國際水價現況解析,中華民國自來水協會會刊,第27卷第4期,2008年11月,第14-23頁。 饒欽良,IWA管網水量損失管理與績效指標簡介,台灣自來水公司自行研究報告,第2-13頁。 鄭錦澤,參加「國際水協會第五屆世界水大會」—談水危機管理、漏水改善及市場經濟自來水會刊雜誌第25卷第四期,2007年7月第100期第91-101頁。 中華民國自來水協會網頁,出席「第一屆國際管線管理及安全研討會」心得報告,2009年3月,http://www.ctwwa.org.tw/。 杨丰华,管網漏損知識講座,中國水網專題報導,http://www.h2o-china.com/。 Assessing the Benefits of Surface Water Quality Improvements(FWR, 1996). Environment Agency,Leakage Methodology Review:Alternative Approaches to Leakage Target Setting,November 2007. Framework to assess environmental costs and benefits for a range of total water management options (EFTEC, CES and CSERGE). Pearson and Trow, Calculating Economic Levels of Leakage, Conference Proceedings, Leakage 2005. RS. Mc-Kenzie and J N Bhagwan, Leakage Management Introduction to WRC Tools to Manage Non-Revenue Water IWA Leakage 2005-Conference. Tripartite Group, Best Practice Principles in the Economic Level of Leakage Calculation, 2002. The Environmental and Social Value of Leakage Reduction (in context with other resource and demand management alternatives)(NERA 1998). The Environmental Costs and Benefits of Water Resources: A Preliminary Methodology.(RPA 1998).
摘要: 在非自來水從業人員的眼裡,自來水供水系統之漏水量高的令人難以接受,民意代表以及環保人士也屢屢表達對於高漏水量之關切,並且相信降低漏水量之目標是可以達成的。 不過,自來水管網之漏水率是否可以無限制的降低,甚至達到完美的「零漏水率」?姑且不論是否具有足夠之經費,一般先進國家都市的自來水管網漏水率多介於4%~30%之譜,可見得漏水防制管理在技術上就是一大挑戰。 漏水防制作業所費不貲,自來水事業機構必須在漏水防制成本與效益之間尋求平衡點,在考量成本效益的原則下,漏水量不可能無限制的降低,而是應該存在一個合理的漏水量(Economic Level of Leakage,簡稱ELL;亦有稱之為Optimum Leakage Level)。 為使有限預算之投資符合經濟效益,我國不僅應該要對合理漏水量的觀念有進一步之認知,也有必要加以落實。不過我國有關合理漏水量之文獻甚少,且著墨亦不多,僅對於觀念加以說明,詳細作法則毫無闡述。因此,建立一套適合我國遵循使用的計算合理漏水量操作準則成為刻不容緩的課題。 國際間常用於計算合理漏水量之方法有二,一為「最小成本法」,另一者為「邊際成本法」,本研究分別予以說明,並比較其優缺點。在計算合理漏水量時,如何將環境與社會之成本及效益融入分析,也是自來水事業單位應考量之重要項目。不過由於社會所認定之價值將會與自來水事業單位不同,因此我國在推動合理漏水量之觀念時,應先考慮究竟是否應將社會與環境成本及效益納入考量。
The level of losses from water supply systems is often considered by observers from outside the industry to be unacceptable. Legislators and environmentalists have expressed concerns at the level of losses, and believe that lower levels should be achievable. Can it be possible to reduce the level of leakage as low as possible, even to a perfect “0 %”? In developed countries the levels of leakage range from 4 percent to 30 percent, so leakage management is a real challenge in technical aspect, not to mention insufficient budget. Leakage control can be expensive, and water companies will seek to achieve an economic balance between the costs of leakage control and the benefits that accrue. Considering cost/benefit concept, it is not possible to reduce the level of leakage unlimitedly, but to operate at an economic level of leakage (ELL). To make limited investment budget more cost effective, water supply industry should have a better understanding of ELL, as well as implement the concept. There are not many papers studying on ELL in Taiwan. No detailed processes, but only basic concept of ELL can be found in these papers where possible. To identify the appropriate principles of calculating ELL to be followed in Taiwan becomes the top priority. Two distinct approaches are often used to calculate economic level of leakage. The first is the least cost approach; the second is the marginal cost approach. The methods of the two approaches are reviewed and compared in this study. When calculating ELL, water companies need to consider the way to incorporate environmental and social costs and benefits to the economic analysis. However, the worth placed by Society on environmental and social costs and benefits differs from the worth placed by the water company. Whether environmental and social costs and benefits should be incorporated to the ELL analysis becomes the first decision to be made.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/5691
其他識別: U0005-1805200900012000
文章連結: http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh1?DocID=U0005-1805200900012000
Appears in Collections:環境工程學系所

文件中的檔案:

取得全文請前往華藝線上圖書館



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.