Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/150245
|
| Title: | 論環境影響評估因應氣候變遷之法制變革 —以開發行為溫室氣體排放之評估為中心
Legal Reforms in Response to Climate Change through Environmental Impact Assessment: A Focus on Assessing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Development Activities |
| Authors: | 粘媺婕
Nien, Mei-Chieh |
| Contributors: | 傅玲靜
Fu, Ling-Ching
粘媺婕
Nien, Mei-Chieh |
| Keywords: | 環境影響評估法
氣候變遷
能源轉型
美國國家環境政策法
於國家環境政策法中考量溫室氣體排放和氣候變遷指引
溫室氣體量化
溫室氣體社會成本化
替代方案
減緩措施
風險評估
風險溝通
風險管理
Environmental Impact Assessment
Climate Change
Energy Transition
National Environmental Policy Act
National Environmental Policy Act Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
Greenhouse Gas Quantification
Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases
Alternative Actions
Mitigation Measures
Risk Assessment
Risk Communication
Risk Management |
| Date: | 2023 |
| Issue Date: | 2024-03-01 14:07:18 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 為了減緩溫室氣體排放，我國政府推動能源轉型政策，進而促進許多太陽光電、風力發電與天然氣相關的開發案，例如生豐一期兆豐農場太陽光電開發案，以及天然氣第三接收站開發案。然而，針對溫室氣體排放的議題，卻未能於上述開發行為中，成為其環境影響評估的審查核心，甚至於個案中產生破壞碳匯以及仍產生諸多溫室氣體排放之爭議。此現象引發本文進一步探討我國現行環境影響評估法制針對溫室氣體排放的評估規定，是否足以充分揭露開發行為所產生的溫室氣體排放情形，以因應溫室氣體減量之趨勢。
我國針對於環境影響評估中，納入溫室氣體排放之評估規範相當簡略，僅於範疇界定指引表中設有勾選溫室氣體減緩之選項。該選項之參考資料於量化溫室氣體的排放範圍，僅要求針對開發行為中的施工及營運階段進行評估，並針對減緩措施提出例示之參考方向。相對而言，美國2016年與2023年發布的「於國家環境政策法中考量溫室氣體排放和氣候變遷指引」，細緻且務實地要求將溫室氣體排放之科學資訊，納入環評的風險評估之中，包括：第一步，透過要求將開發行為產生的溫室氣體排放量化作為指標，包括產業之上下游，以建立數據之比較基礎；第二步，透過將溫室氣體社會成本化的方法，將量化數據乘以一公噸溫室氣體所造成的氣候損害，以具體價額的方式呈現個案對氣候變遷的影響，不僅得以突顯政府決策對環境的傷害程度，亦得有效地輔助環境價值與其他價值進行比較與權衡；第三步，透過上述的溫室氣體排放的量化與社會成本化數據，進一步分析擬議行動的替代方案與減緩措施，使擬議行動與其替代方案的負面影響保持透明度，輔助機關作出以科學為基礎的明智決策，選擇有助於氣候變遷目標的行動。
由兩者比較可知，我國現行環境影響評估法制對氣候變遷影響的評估之規範有所不足—欠缺整體產業上下游之溫室氣體排放量化規定，亦未要求將溫室氣體社會成本化，更忽視替代方案之重要性，進而導致開發行為鮮少於環評之風險評估中以溫室氣體排放減量的角度，探討個案究竟係帶來減緩或加劇溫室氣體的影響，而難以於各該開發行為中充分地因應氣候變遷。
In order to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, the government of Taiwan has been promoting an energy transition policy, which has led to the development of many solar photovoltaic, wind power, and natural gas-related projects, such as the first phase of the Seng Feng Megafarm Solar Photovoltaic Development Project and the development of the third natural gas receiving station. However, the issue of greenhouse gas emissions has not been a central focus of environmental impact assessments in the aforementioned development activities, and it has even generated controversies regarding the destruction of carbon sinks and the continued production of greenhouse gases. This phenomenon has prompted this article to further explore whether the current environmental impact assessment regulations in Taiwan are sufficient to adequately disclose the greenhouse gas emissions generated by development activities in response to the trend of greenhouse gas reduction.
In Taiwan, the regulations for including greenhouse gas emissions in environmental impact assessments are quite simplistic. It only provides an option to check for greenhouse gas reduction in the scope definition guideline table. The reference information for quantifying greenhouse gas emissions only requires an assessment of the construction and operational phases of the development activity and offers some indicative directions for mitigation measures. In contrast, the " National Environmental Policy Act Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change " released by the United States in 2016 and 2023 provides detailed and practical requirements for incorporating scientific information on greenhouse gas emissions into environmental risk assessments. The steps are as follows: In the first step, quantifying the greenhouse gas emissions generated by the development activity, including the upstream and downstream impacts of the industry, to establish a data comparison baseline. In the second step, monetizing greenhouse gas emissions by multiplying the quantified data by the cost of climate damage caused by one metric ton of greenhouse gases, presenting the impact of the project on climate change in specific monetary terms. This not only highlights the environmental harm caused by government decisions but also assists in comparing and balancing environmental values against other values. In the third step, quantified and monetized data on greenhouse gas emissions are employed to conduct a thorough analysis of alternative actions and mitigation measures. Emphasis is placed on ensuring transparency regarding the negative impacts of the proposed action and its alternatives. This approach allows for scientifically informed decisions to be made by agencies, contributing effectively to climate change goals.
Comparing the two, it's evident that Taiwan's current environmental impact assessment (EIA) regulations fall short in assessing the impact on climate change. There's a lack of comprehensive industry-wide rules for quantifying greenhouse gas emissions, no requirement to monetize these emissions, and an oversight regarding the importance of alternative solutions. As a result, development activities are rarely evaluated within the EIA process in terms of their impact on greenhouse gas emissions. This hinders our ability to effectively address climate change in various development projects. |
| Reference: | 一、中文
（一）專書
Ulrich Beck著，汪浩譯，風險社會—通往另一個現代的路上，巨流圖書，2004年。
杜文苓，環境風險與公共治理 探索台灣環境民主實踐之道，五南，2015年。
林駿，環境規劃與管理（上），第五版，大碩教育，2014 年。
陳慈陽，環境法總論，第三版，元照，2011年。
（二）專書論文
張文貞，氣候變遷下的環境影響評估初探，收錄於：葉俊榮主編，氣候變遷的制度因應—決策、財務與規範，國立臺灣大學出版中心，2014年8月，頁45-70。
張文貞，氣候變遷納入環境影響評估的全球實踐：趨利的比較分析，收錄於：葉俊榮主編，氣候變遷的制度因應—決策、財務與規範，國立臺灣大學出版中心，2014年8月，頁71-104。
傅玲靜，環境法上之管制工具與保護規範⎯⎯以環境標準為例，臺北市政府訴願審議委員會，訴願專論選輯—訴願新制專論系列之十二，2011年，頁74-106。
葉俊榮，氣候變遷的影響評估，收錄於：葉俊榮，氣候變遷治理與法律，國立臺灣大學出版中心，2015年11月，頁166-199。
（三）期刊論文
Hans-Jürgen Papier著，呂理翔譯，風險中的法治國，月旦法學雜誌，第203期，2012年，頁241-256。
牛惠之，人類基因資料庫的潛在風險議題定性與風險管理模式之研議，2007科技發展與法律規範雙年刊，2008年，頁143-196。
牛惠之，預防原則之研究—國際環境法處理欠缺科學證據之環境風險議題之努力與爭議，國立臺灣大學法學論叢，第34卷第3期，2005年，頁1-71。
王服清，論「預防原則」之意涵與應用，國立中正大學法學集刊，第37期，2012年，頁117-187。
王毓正，環評審查結論之條件與環評承諾於行政訴訟中相關爭議問題之探討，興大法學，第23期，2018年，頁109-148。
李建良，環境影響評估與開發許可之關聯─環評法制二十年的廿項法治課題之一，月旦法學雜誌，第243期，2015年，頁192-211。
李建良，以正當程序的觀點所論述之正當行政程序與有效司法救濟之交互作用：以環評制度為中心之臺灣與德國法比較，月旦法學雜誌，環境法特刊期，2019年，頁5-28。
周桂田，知識、科學與不確定性—專家與科技系統的「無知」如何建構風險，政治與社會哲學評論，第13期，2005年，頁131-180。
林昱梅，預防原則與「停、看、聽」環評機制之落實 -中科三期環評案之省思，台灣法學雜誌，第161期，2010年，頁17-30。
林春元，環境影響評估納入氣候變遷的司法途徑—美國法的發展與啟示，中原財經法學，第35期，2015年，頁169-237 。
宮文祥，當行政遇上科學：從風險評估談起—以美國法為例，月旦法學雜誌，第153期，2008年，頁90-112。
宮文祥，初探科學在環境法發展上所扮演的角色，科技法學評論，第7卷第2期，2010年，頁152-158。
宮文祥，從氣候變遷到能源轉型—幾點爭議問題初探，月旦法學雜誌，第33期，2022年，頁25-37。
宮文祥，環評法下當事人適格之探討—臺北高等行政法院 109 年度訴字第 618 號判決，台灣當代法律，第 12 期，2022年，頁105-113。
袁國寧，現代社會風險倫理之探析—臺灣颱風、洪水災害風險管理觀點，亞太經濟管理評論，第10卷第2期，2007年，頁47-78。
高仁川，地方政府作為氣候變遷及環境治理的參與行動主體，台灣法學雜誌，第213期，2012年，頁69-90。
高仁川，判斷餘地理論於臺灣環評訴訟之適用─最高行政法院一○○年度判字第一○二二號判決的比較分析，月旦法學雜誌，第237期，2015年，頁216-235。
程明修，行政法上之預防原則─食品安全風險管理手段之擴張，月旦法學雜誌，第167期，2009 年，頁 127-136。
許宏達，環境風險管制之法律建制：以行政管制方法之變遷為中心，國立中正大學法學集刊，第 44 期，2014年，頁113-202。
黃丞儀，環境程序中的範疇界定及司法審查，台灣法律人，第13期，2022年，頁1-18。
傅玲靜，由行政程序法之適用論我國環境影響評估審查之法制，中原財經法學第23期，2009年，頁37-105。
傅玲靜，我國化學物質法制規範體系之檢討—以德國法制之觀察及比較為中心，科技法學評論，第10卷第2期，2013年，頁153-202。
傅玲靜，環境影響評估程序重新進行及藻礁生態保育—評最高行政法院109年度上字第848號判決，公法研究，第3期，2022年，頁207-240。
（四）研究計畫
傅玲靜，由環境規劃及風險管理之角度重新檢視環境開發案件中司法審查之密度—以中科四期開發案及元利建設都市更新案為例，科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告，2016年。
（五）學位論文
尤膺豪，臺灣離岸風場環境影響評估制度與影響因子之研究，國立臺灣海洋大學海洋事務與資源管理研究所碩士論文，2018年。
吳衍諭，台灣環境影響評估制度分析：以台灣能源政策為例，國立臺灣大學環境工程學研究所博士論文，2018年。
孟祥因，論離岸風電之環境影響評估，逢甲大學土地管理學系碩士論文，2020年。
侯宜諮，風險行政法的建制嘗試─以食品衛生安全領域為中心，國立政治大學法律學研究所碩 士論文，2013年。
陳宗憶，國家的風險決策與風險決策監督─以建立「風險原則」為中心，國立台灣大學法律學 研究所碩士論文，2008年 。
蕭可晉，環境影響評估審查流程考量氣候變遷相關承諾之研究，國立臺北大學自然資源與環境管理研究所在職專班碩士論文，2022年。
二、英文
（一）專書
Frantzen, Kurt A., Risk-Based Analysis for Environmental Managers, CRC Press, (2002).
National Research Council, Committee on the Institutional Means for Assessment of Risks to Public Health, Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process, National Academies Press (1983).
National Research Council, Building Consensus through Risk Assessment and Management of the Department of Energy’s Environmental Remediation Program, National Academies Press (1994)
National Research Council, Committee on Improving Risk Analysis Approaches Used by the U.S. EPA Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology Division on Earth and Life Studies, Science and Decisions：Advancing Risk Assessment, National Academies Press (2009).
（二）期刊論文
Andreen, William L., In Pursuit of NEPA’s Promise: The Role of Executive Oversight in the Implementation of the Environmental Policy, 64 IND. L.J. 205-261 (1989).
Applegate, John S., & Campbell-Mohn, Celia., Learning from NEPA: Some Guidelines for Responsible Federal Risk Legislation, 23 Harv. Envtl. L. Rev. 93-138 (1999).
Bosselman, Fred P., & Tarlock, A. Dan., The Influence of Ecological Science on American Law: An Introduction, 69 CHI.- KENT L. Rev., 847-873 (1994).
Burger, Michael, & Wentz, Jessica A., Downstream and Upstream Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Proper Scope of NEPA Review, 41 Harv. Envtl. L. Rev., 109-187 (2017).
Camacho, Alejandro E., Transforming the Means and Ends of Natural Resources Management, 89 N.C. L. REV., 1405-1454 (2011).
DeShazo, J. R. & Freeman, Jody., Timing and Form of Federal Regulation: The Case of Climate Change, 155 U. Pa. L. Rev., 1499-1561 (2007).
Eccleston, Charles H., The Decision-Identification Tree: A New NEPA Scoping Tool, Environmental Management 26(4), 457-464 (2000).
Glicksman, Robert L., & Camacho, Alejandro E., The Trump Card: Tarnishing Planning, Democracy, and the Environment, 50 ENv'T L. REP., 10281-10289 (2020).
Hattis, Dale, Drawing the Line: Quantitative Criteria for Risk Management, Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 38:6, 10-39 (1996).
Hornstein, Donald T., Reclaiming Environmental Law: A Normative Critique of Comparative Risk Analysis, 92 Colum. L. Rev., 562-633 (1992).
Hein, Jayni F. & Jacewicz, Natalie, Implementing NEPA in the Age of Climate Change, 10 Mich. J. Envtl. & Admin. L., 1-58 (2020).
Latin, Howard, Ideal versus Real Regulatory Efficiency: Implementation of Uni- form Standards and “Fine-Tuning” Regulatory Reforms, 37 Stan. L. Rev., 1267-1332 (1985).
Light, Sarah E., NEPA’s Footprint: Information Disclosure As a Quasi-Carbon Tax on Agencies, 87 Tul. L. Rev., 512-572 (2013).
Mauhs, Fred, Cumulative Impact Analysis in NEPA Climate Assessments, 39 Pace Envtl. L. Rev., 211-256 (2022).
Nordhaus, William D., Revisiting the Social Cost of Carbon, 114 PROC. NAT' LACAD. SCL, 1518-1523 (2017).
Revesz, Richard L. & Sarinsky, Max., The Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Legal, Economic, and Institutional Perspective, 39 Yale J. on Reg., 856-907 (2022).
Stack, Kevin M. & Vandenbergh, Michael P., The One Percent Problem, 111 COLUM. L. Rev., 1385-1443 (2011).
Vandenbergh, Michael P. & Cohen, Mark A., Climate Change Governance: Boundaries and Leakage, 18 N.Y.U. ENVTL. L.J., 221-292 (2010).
Williams, Doug, Teaching Environmental Law After Trump, 66 St. Louis U. L.J., 468-510 (2022).
（三）網路資料
1、政府及國際組織文件
Council on Environmental Quality, The First Annual Report of the Council on Environmental Quality (1970), https://www.slideshare.net/whitehouse/august-1970-environmental-quality-the-first-annual-report-of (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Council on Environmental Quality, The National Environmental Policy Act Study of Its Effectiveness After Twenty-five Years (1997), https://ceq.doe.gov/docs/ceq-publications/nepa25fn.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Council on Environmental Quality, Considering Cumulative Effects under the National Environmental Policy Act (1997), https://ceq.doe.gov/docs/ceq-publications/ccenepa/exec.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Council on Environmental Quality, Guidance on the Consideration of Past Actions in Cumulative Effects Analysis (2005), https://www.energy.gov/nepa/articles/guidance-consideration-past-actions-cumulative-effects-analysis-ceq-2005 (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Council on Environmental Quality, Final Guidance for Federal Departments and Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in National Environmental Policy Act Reviews (2016), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/09/2023-00158/national-environmental-policy-act-guidance-on-consideration-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-climate (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Council on Environmental Quality, Fact Sheet: Modernizing CEQ’s NEPA Regulations (2020), https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/20200716FinalNEPA-Fact-Sheet.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Council on Environmental Quality, A Citizen’s Guide to NEPA Having Your Voice Heard 8(2021), https://ceq.doe.gov/docs/get-involved/citizens-guide-to-nepa-2021.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Council on Environmental Quality, National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations Revisions, 86 Fed. Reg. 55757 (2021), https://reurl.cc/N4jnWk (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Council on Environmental Quality, 87 Fed. Reg. 23453 (2022), https://reurl.cc/Z9OE0W (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Council on Environmental Quality, Final Guidance for Federal Departments and Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in National Environmental Policy Act Reviews (2023), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/09/2023-00158/national-environmental-policy-act-guidance-on-consideration-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-climate, (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration, Environmental Review Toolkit, Interim Guidance on the Application of Travel and Land Use Forecasting in NEPA, Consideration of Peer Review (2010), https://reurl.cc/prDLMd (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, Managing Water in the West Reclamation NEPA Handbook (2012), https://reurl.cc/zlyAlp (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Department of the Army U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Final Independent External Peer Review Report on the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Mississippi River between the Ohio and Missouri Rivers (2016), https://reurl.cc/dLr71z (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Environmental Protection Agency, Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, 74 Fed. Reg. 66496 (2009), https://reurl.cc/77Xn8N (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Environmental Protection Agency, Final Rule for Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources Electric Utility Generating Units, 80 Fed. Reg. 64661 (2015), https://reurl.cc/67gNqd (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Interagency Working Grp. on the Soc. Cost of Carbon, Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis (2010), https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-12/documents/scc_tsd_2010.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
South Africa Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Overview of Integrated Environmental Management (2004), https://www.dffe.gov.za/sites/default/files/docs/series0%20_overview.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
United Nations, Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology(COMEST), The Precautionary Principle 40 (2005), https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000139578 (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Update to the Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the NEPA(to be codified at 40 CFR Part 1500–1508.2), 85 Fed. Reg. 43304 (2020) , https://reurl.cc/VN67VY(last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Lands Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sequestration in the United States: Estimates For 2005-14 (2018), https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/sir20185131(last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
United States Department of Agriculture, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/olympic/landmanagement/projects/?cid=stelprd3822510 (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
United States Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Federal Mining Plan Modification Environmental Assessment (2018), https://perma.cc/Z5VY-37A8 (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
White House Fact Sheet: List of Agency Actions for Review (2021), https://reurl.cc/D41Aod (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
2、其他網路資料
Climate Change Litigation Databases, San Juan Citizens Alliance v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, https://climatecasechart.com/wp-content/uploads/case-documents/2018/20181026_docket-18-2119_order.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Institute for Policy Integrity, Social Costs of Greenhouse Gases (2017), https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/social_cost_of_greenhouse_gases_factsheet.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
Institute for Policy Integrity, Omitted Damages: What's Missing from the Social Cost of Carbon (2014), https://costofcarbon.org/files/Omitted_Damages_Whats_Missing_From_the_Social_Cost_of_Carbon.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
International Energy Agency, Global Methane Tracker 2022 (2022), https://www.iea.org/reports/global-methane-tracker-2022 (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
International Energy Agency, Global Methane Tracker 2022 (2022), https://www.iea.org/reports/global-methane-tracker-2022/strategies-to-reduce-emissions-from-fossil-fuel-operations (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
United Nations, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992), https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_CONF.151_26_Vol.I_Declaration.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024).
World Commission on Environment and Development, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, (1987) https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf (last visited: Jan. 27, 2024). |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
法律科際整合研究所
107652003 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107652003 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [法律科際整合研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 200301.pdf | | 2674Kb | Adobe PDF | 2 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
