近零碳辦公建築成本效益分析
Authors: 嚴佳茹 嚴佳茹 , Chia-Ju Yen 李魁鵬 , 林憲德 林憲德 , Hsien-Te Lin 吳建興 , 周瑞法 周瑞法 , 陳匯中 陳匯中 
Published: December 2024

<p>為了輔佐政府順利執行淨零建築政策，以辦公建築作為研究對象，針對新建建築能效標示系統(BERSn)的三大關鍵控制因子，外殼節能效率(EEV)、照明節能效率(EL)與空調節能效率(EAC)，分析節能設備投資成本與能效得分的關係，提供最佳設備投資成本效益設計策略。首先，本研究建立近零碳辦公建築成本分析基準案為滿足當前綠建築標章的合格水準，即EAC=0.8、EL=0.8，定義近零碳投資成本分析條件為EAC≦0.5且EL≦0.5(節能率ESR應小於0.5)。透過28位空調專家問卷之基本型、中階型和高階型技術三種等級空調設備與空調節能技術的成本單價分析並擬定出最具成本效益與可行性的近零碳空調方案，確保空調設備總效率ACE &le;0.8之建議方案，以及節能技術(&alpha;1~&alpha;12)總節能率≧0.3來掌握空調之溢價成本，以最佳設備方案與節能技術成本進行溢價成本分析，空調溢價比為25.5~39.7%。在近零碳照明要求水準之下模擬發現在滿足作業平均照度500LUX條件下，LED平板燈或T8 LED燈具(包含具節能標章)即可達成EL≦0.5之照明水準。近零碳辦公建築的溢價成本以七個案例的地上樓地板面積與造價金額作為基準來計算近零方案之空調與照明溢價成本，造價溢價比為0.46~1.50%、投資回收年限約2.4~6.6年，結果顯示台灣近零碳設計成本比較低的主因為亞熱帶氣候的外殼節能效益有限，不強化外殼設計、照明不增加成本，能效措施在執行空調近零設計，不論規模、不論空調形式在國際比較下均為很低、很有投資效益之政策，可大幅減少推動近零建築政策的阻力，值得我政府與民間大力推動，也證實EEWH-BERS可以提供合乎邏輯、平價化且符合市場條件需求之可行解決方案。</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p><p>To assist the government in successfully implementing the net-zero building policy, the study takes office buildings as the object of research and analyzes the relationship between the investment cost of energy-saving equipment and the energy efficiency score for the three key control factors of the new building energy efficiency labeling system (BERSn), namely, the energy efficiency of the building envelope (EEV), the energy efficiency of the lighting (EL), and the energy efficiency of the air-conditioning (EAC), and provides the optimal design strategy of the equipment cost-effectiveness of the investment. Firstly, this study establishes a benchmark for analyzing the cost of nearly-zero carbon office buildings to meet the current green building standard, i.e., EAC=0.8 and EL=0.8, and defines the conditions for analyzing the cost of nearly-zero carbon investment as EAC≦0.5 and EL≦0.5 (the energy saving rate ESR should be less than 0.5). Through the questionnaire of 28 air-conditioning experts, the cost unit price analysis of three levels of air-conditioning equipment and air-conditioning energy-saving technologies, namely basic, intermediate and advanced technologies, the most cost-effective and feasible nearly-zero-carbon air-conditioning solutions are formulated to ensure that the total efficiency of the air-conditioning equipment, ACE &le; 0.8, and the total energy-saving rate of energy-saving technologies (&alpha;1 ~ &alpha;12) is ≧ 0.3 to master the air-conditioning increment cost. This increment cost is calculated based on the cost of optimal equipment and energy-saving technologies. The increment cost analysis is based on the optimal equipment and energy-saving technology costs, and the air conditioning increment ratio is 25.5~39.7%. Under the nearly-zero carbon lighting requirement level, the simulation found that under the condition of meeting the average illumination level of 500LUX, the LED flat panel lamp or T8 LED lamps (including the energy-saving label) can achieve the lighting level of EL≦0.5. There are seven cases of the floor area above ground floor and the project cost as a basis for calculating the nearly-zero program of air conditioning and lighting increment cost, the cost increment ratio of 0.60 ~ 1.50%, the payback period of about 2.8 ~ 7.7 years, the results show that Taiwan’s nearly-zero carbon design cost is lower mainly because of the energy-saving benefits of the building shell of the sub-tropical climate is limited, do not strengthen the shell design. Cost is not increased for building envelope and lighting; energy efficiency measures in the implementation of air-conditioning nearly-zero strategy, regardless of scale, irrespective of the air-conditioning form in the international comparison is meager, the very investment-effective policy can significantly reduce the resistance to promote the policy of nearly-zero building, it is worthwhile for the government and the community to encourage vigorously, but also to confirm that the EEWH-BERS can provide a logical, affordable and feasible solution to archived the needs of the market conditions.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>