庞凯莉,张凯山,第宝锋,马帅.中国农业与工程机械尾气减排控制措施的费效分析[J].中国环境管理,2019,11(2):55-61
中国农业与工程机械尾气减排控制措施的费效分析
Cost-Beneft Analysis of Emission Control Measures for Agricultural and Industrial Equipment in China
  
DOI:10.16868/j.cnki.1674-6252.2019.02.055
中文关键词:  费效分析  减排措施  非道路移动源
英文关键词:cost-beneft analysis  emission control measure  non-road equipment source
基金项目:国家环境保护公益性行业科研专项(201409012)。
作者单位E-mail
庞凯莉 四川大学建筑与环境学院, 四川成都 610000  
张凯山 四川大学建筑与环境学院, 四川成都 610000 kanshanzhang@yahoo.com 
第宝锋 四川大学建筑与环境学院, 四川成都 610000  
马帅 四川大学建筑与环境学院, 四川成都 610000  
摘要点击次数: 115
全文下载次数: 81
中文摘要:
      移动源尾气排放已成为我国空气污染的主要来源之一,相比于道路移动源来说,非道路移动源尾气排放的减排控制工作仍处于初级阶段。本研究就非道路移动源尾气减排控制的三种主要措施——整车淘汰、发动机更换以及发动机维修,对中国非道路工程和农业机械进行费效分析,探讨经济可行的控制途径。研究假设农业和工程机械的使用年限分别为15年和10年,同时假设采取减排措施后所有机械均达到国IV排放标准。研究表明,采取减排措施后,农业机械每年可减排NOx 40万~45万t,但PM污染物减排效益不明显;工程机械每年可减排NOx约52万t,且PM污染物每年可减排量约16万t,但费用可高达2000亿~25 000亿元,且不同措施的差别巨大,以整车淘汰费用最高。多数农业机械发动机维修所需费用高于发动机更换,相反,工程机械发动机更换所需费用高于发动机维修。因此,在采用减排措施和制定政策时,需要根据实际情况进行调整。对农业机械,采用发动机更换的减排方式更经济;对工程机械,采用发动机维修的减排措施更实惠。
英文摘要:
      Emissions from mobile sources have become one of the key contributors to air pollution in China. Compared to on-road equipment, emissions control for non-road equipment is still at its early stages. The objective of this study is to evaluate three different emission control measures for agricultural and industrial equipment using cost-beneft analysis, including turn-over, replacement, and retroft. A useful life of 15 and 10 years was assumed for agricultural and industrial equipment, respectively in this study. It was also assumed that all equipment would meet the National IV emission standards after any of the emission control measures was used. The results showed that for NOx, a reduction of approximately 400,000-450,000 tons and 520,000 tons can be achieved for agricultural and industrial equipment, respectively. For PM, since the current emissions level for agricultural equipment is similar to the National IV standards, the reduction is limited. Contrastingly, a reduction of 160,000 tons can be achieved for industrial equipment. The cost for such achievement ranged from 0.2-2.5 trillion RMB depending on control measures with turn-over being the most expensive option. The most cost-effective option for emission control varies by equipment type. For agricultural equipment, the favorable choice is replacement while retroft is the best choice for industrial equipment.
HTML  查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭