學術產出-學位論文
文章檢視/開啟
書目匯出
-
題名 臺灣能源轉型的民主挑戰：以萬里金山對地熱能發展的社會接受為啟示
The Democratic Challenges of Taiwan's Energy Transition: Insights from the Social Acceptance of Geothermal Development in Wanli and Jinshan作者 郭彥廷
Kuo, Yen-Ting貢獻者 杜文苓
Tu, Wen-Ling
郭彥廷
Kuo, Yen-Ting關鍵詞 能源民主
社會接受
再生能源
地熱
Energy democracy
social acceptance
renewable energy
geothermal energy日期 2024 上傳時間 1-十一月-2024 11:06:06 (UTC+8) 摘要 在邁向更為淨零、永續社會的路程中，再生能源成為全球各國極力發展的建設項目。在發展再生能源的同時，除了改善環境現況，也希望能夠促進更為公正、正義的社會，建立一個有別於傳統化石燃料能源壟斷、集中的決策模式，重視能源與地方的互動、關注社區福祉並促進居民的參與，這在許多國家包括臺灣皆在再生能源相關政策中都有著墨。然而發展至今，仍能發現過去能源建設造成的環境、社會傷害的景象發生於再生能源的發展之中。在許多案例中，也看到了能源與地方社區的衝突，除了地方的環境衝擊，也包括了利害關係人參與、溝通的程序不利居民參與，或是對於能源發展的不同想像難以交集。 關於再生能源的研究多半聚焦於技術、經濟面向，關於社會議題的探討卻僅佔少數，過去的公共行政領域也較少對其投入關注。再生能源政策主要由國家中央層級制定，然而真正落實之處在於地方，為了使其能夠更順利地推行，有效地與社會共榮共存，在地社群的接受程度便是計畫成敗的關鍵。在此之中，我們看到了再生能源發展是一項跨學科（transdisciplinary）議題，以及社會科學所扮演的重要角色。 憑藉先天的自然條件優勢，以及技術、成本問題逐漸被克服的情況下，近年來地熱在臺灣的成長快速，至今被列為我國重點發展的前瞻能源之一，在許多地區也正進行探勘、建廠作業。有別於常見的風電、光電，地熱的規模較小、基載特性使其在未來發展上可能走出不同的路徑。然而與其他能源相同的是，地熱的開發仍須面臨風險控管以及如何使地方居民共同參與、利益共享等問題。除了國外，近年在臺灣也曾經發生與地熱能相關的地方社會爭議。 是故，本研究援引了能源民主（energy democracy）及社會接受（social acceptance）之概念，以地熱能發展的角度切入出發，並以臺灣北海岸地區作為主要研究場域。北海岸地區具有近半世紀的能源發展史，我國許多重要的能源設施皆建於此地，如火力（協和電廠）、核能（核一、核二、核四廠）、離岸風力等。然而在發展的同時也伴隨著許多爭議以及不公。近期位於大屯山地區的四磺子坪先導地熱廠正式啟用，其所屬的硫磺子坪地熱能示範區也開始動土，這意味著未來地熱亦有可能在北海岸地區有更多的發展。本文透過深度訪談，瞭解民間組織及地方社群對於地熱的認知與想像，並探討有什麼樣的機制與方法能促進居民在能源方面的決策參與並從中受益。藉由個案研究的方式，希望能夠給予未來臺灣在再生能源的社會基礎建設方面給予啟示，並精進當前的溝通、參與機制，以更加落實公平與正義。
In the journey towards a cleaner, zero-emission, and sustainable society, renewable energy has become a major construction project vigorously pursued by countries worldwide. While developing renewable energy aims to improve environmental conditions, there is also a desire to promote a more just and equitable society. This involves establishing a decision-making model distinct from the traditional fossil fuel energy monopoly and concentration, emphasizing the interaction between energy and localities, focusing on community well-being, and promoting resident participation. Many countries, including Taiwan, address these aspects in their renewable energy policies. However, despite the progress, one can still observe environmental and social damage occurring in the development of renewable energy, reminiscent of the issues caused by conventional energy construction. Most research on renewable energy predominantly focuses on technical and economic aspects, with limited discussion on social issues. Public administration has historically shown less interest in this field. While renewable energy policies are primarily formulated at the national level, their successful implementation depends on local acceptance. The willingness of local communities to embrace these projects is crucial for their success. Within this context, the development of renewable energy emerges as a transdisciplinary issue, with a significant role played by the social sciences. Benefiting from inherent natural advantages and overcoming technological and cost-related challenges, geothermal energy has witnessed rapid growth in Taiwan in recent years. It is now considered one of the country's key prospective energy sources, with exploration and construction activities taking place in various regions. Unlike more common wind and solar energy sources, geothermal energy's smaller scale and baseload characteristics may pave the way for different development paths in the future. However, like other energy sources, geothermal development still faces challenges such as risk management and addressing issues related to local residents' participation and benefit-sharing. In recent years, disputes related to geothermal energy have also occurred in Taiwan. This study draws on the concepts of energy democracy and social acceptance, focusing on the perspective of geothermal energy development and using the northern coast of Taiwan as the primary research area. The northern coast has a history of nearly half a century in energy development, hosting crucial energy facilities such as thermal power plants, nuclear power plants, and offshore wind farms. However, along with development, numerous controversies and injustices have arisen. The recently inaugurated Sulfur Creek Pilot Geothermal Plant in Datun Mountain area indicates the potential for further geothermal development on the northern coast. Through in-depth interviews, this research aims to understand the perceptions and imaginations of civil organizations and local communities regarding geothermal energy. It explores mechanisms and methods that can enhance residents' proactive participation and decision-making in energy matters for their benefit. By adopting a case study approach, the hope is to provide insights for Taiwan's future social infrastructure in renewable energy, suggesting ways to improve current communication and participation mechanisms to achieve greater fairness and justice.參考文獻 一、中文文獻 尤聰光（2023）。台東地熱發電啟動 每日供電900戶。https://www.re.org.tw/news/more.aspx?cid=198&id=5902。 尤聰光（2023）。地熱發電惹禍？天災改變泉脈？ 金崙野溪溫泉乾涸謎團待解。https://udn.com/news/story/7328/7657748?fbclid=IwAR0n3m58wFGZdTygxGM_OLpRgByCUzdNyZVDXcLFan_h_wWi184xyHXXHVw。 尤聰光（2024）。台東「地熱」綠能勢不可擋 工研院紅葉探勘有進展。https://www.re.org.tw/news/more.aspx?cid=198&id=6743 文傑格達德班（2017）。廠商擬金崙蓋發電廠 部落說明多數民不知情。https://www.tipp.org.tw/news_article.asp?F_ID=81079&FT_No=1。 王舜薇（2022）。社區電廠如何成為支持體系？參訪北海岸金山「翡翠一號」電廠。https://rsprc.ntu.edu.tw/zh-tw/m01-3/en-trans/1675-0222-community-renewable.html。 田秋堇、蔡崇義、賴振昌（2019）。核四仲裁案 調查報告。https://www-ws.cy.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMy9yZWxmaWxlLzg5MTIvMjE5NTIvOTk4ZGFlYjYtMGUxNC00ZGJlLThlN2EtNjM1Y2Y3ZDRhOGE1LnBkZg%3D%3D&n=5qC45Zub5Luy6KOB5qGI6Kq%2F5p%2Bl5aCx5ZGK6KiY6ICF5pyD57Ch5aCxLnBkZg%3D%3D。 江櫻梅（2021）。阿母的買菜之路：核電陰影下的金山小鎮。https://opinion.cw.com.tw/blog/profile/52/article/11056。 行政院（2019a）。離岸風電推動現況與展望。2023年3月15日，取自：https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/448DE008087A1971/a26c4710-7e36-4d89-94f2-593f73a47452 行政院（2019b）。風力發電4年推動計畫。2023年3月26日，取自：https://www.moeaboe.gov.tw/ECW/populace/content/ContentDesc.aspx?menu_id=5493 吳天明（2017）。台電在台灣本島及離島推動風力發電概況報導。https://web.archive.org/web/20190701063241/http://dept.taipower.com.tw/yuan/yuan_91/yuan_pdf/91_2.pdf。 吳佩蓉（2022）。投入8億！宜蘭清水電廠商轉，11年後才回本。https://esg.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/180694/post/202203290034。 吳瀛洲（2023）。新北首座地熱發電廠 10月完工商轉。https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E6%96%B0%E5%8C%97%E9%A6%96%E5%BA%A7%E5%9C%B0%E7%86%B1%E7%99%BC%E9%9B%BB%E5%BB%A0-10%E6%9C%88%E5%AE%8C%E5%B7%A5%E5%95%86%E8%BD%89-133820101.html。 宋聖榮、盧乙嘉、劉佳枚、張竝瑜（2015）。台灣地熱潛能、現況和發展困境。石油季刊，51（1），61-82。 李亨山（2018）。說明會疑有瑕疵 金崙地熱發電廠補件再審。https://www.cna.com.tw/news/ahel/201803070171.aspx。 李若慈（2016）。看見核電廠旁，「它核他們的故事」。https://opinion.cw.com.tw/blog/profile/52/article/11724。 李清瑞、江道義、陳榮輝 (1994) 。台灣地熱探勘資料彙整。 李蘇竣（2022）。核一廠除役拆除要蓋低放貯存庫 地方說明會引居民反彈。https://e-info.org.tw/node/235807。 汪志宏（2020）。紅葉部落地熱鑽探爆民怨 反地熱自救聯盟至縣府抗議陳情。https://old.hsnews.com.tw/life/7904-%e7%b4%85%e8%91%89%e9%83%a8%e8%90%bd%e5%9c%b0%e7%86%b1%e9%91%bd%e6%8e%a2%e7%88%86%e6%b0%91%e6%80%a8-%e5%8f%8d%e5%9c%b0%e7%86%b1%e8%87%aa%e6%95%91%e8%81%af%e7%9b%9f%e8%87%b3%e7%b8%a3%e5%ba%9c%e6%8a%97%e8%ad%b0%e9%99%b3%e6%83%85。 林吉洋（2020a）。震動的紅葉部落01》地熱鑽探干擾村民爆爭議，縣府稱私有地不需經部落同意，環團批法規模糊。https://www.newsmarket.com.tw/blog/140146/ 林吉洋（2020b）。震動的紅葉部落02》他們為什麼反地熱？中生代覺醒參戰，拒絕外力決定部落命運。https://www.newsmarket.com.tw/blog/140143/ 林孟汝、林淑媛（2018）。伴台灣走過40年風華 核一功成身退。https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/201812020017.aspx。 林雨佑（2022）。當光電包圍漁村：七股漁電共生風波再起，居民在抗議什麼？ https://www.twreporter.org/a/qigu-fishery-electricity-symbiosis 林錦仁（2000）。宜蘭清水地熱開發之探討。石油季刊，36（1），29-38。 花孟璟（2020）。遭花蓮紅葉部落控告偽文 地熱業者否認：私有地開發免諮商同意。https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/3371667。 花蓮縣議會（2020）。本會召開「針對縣內萬榮鄉紅葉村地熱開發發展之執行進度」之專案會議。https://www.hlcc.gov.tw/news_detail.php?index_no=410。 國家發展委員會（2022）。國家融資保證機制推動方案。 國家發展委員會（2022）。臺灣2050淨零排放路徑及策略總說明。https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=DEE68AAD8B38BD76 國家發展委員會（2022）。臺灣2050淨零排放路徑及策略總說明。https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=DEE68AAD8B38BD76。 國發會（2020）。國家融資保證機制係為協助國內業者而非為外商融資。2023年3月26日，取自：https://www.ndc.gov.tw/nc_8456_34445。 張岱屏（2014）。不核作的選擇。https://ourisland.pts.org.tw/content/1584。 張岱屏（2021）。當核電退役時｜核廢料該安置在哪裡？https://ourisland.pts.org.tw/content/8070。 章明哲（2022）。台東金崙地下水位突降10公尺 縣府初判6月連續地震所致。https://news.pts.org.tw/article/590383。 陳俊碩（2020）。花蓮地熱開發案引部落抗議 縣府盼互惠求雙贏。https://www.cna.com.tw/news/aloc/202010140184.aspx。 陳彥仲（2018）。設置離岸風力發電機現行法規及對審議機制之建議。https://learnenergy.tw/index.php?inter=knowledge&caid=4&id=340 陳昭宏、李蘇竣（2022）。【整理包】離岸風場競逐區塊開發：首輪選商、生態爭議、新興工法一次。2023年4月16日，取自：https://esg.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/180692/post/202210120016/%E3%80%90%E6%95%B4%E7%90%86%E5%8C%85%E3%80%91%E9%9B%A2%E5%B2%B8%E9%A2%A8%E5%A0%B4%E7%AB%B6%E9%80%90%E5%8D%80%E5%A1%8A%E9%96%8B%E7%99%BC%EF%BC%9A%E9%A6%96%E8%BC%AA%E9%81%B8%E5%95%86%E3%80%81%E7%94%9F%E6%85%8B%E7%88%AD%E8%AD%B0%E3%80%81%E6%96%B0%E8%88%88%E5%B7%A5%E6%B3%95%E4%B8%80%E6%AC%A1%E7%9C%8B 陳美蘭、張永源、連永順（2022）。離岸風力發電發展趨勢與展望。 陳賢義（2023）。首座地熱發電廠穩定輸出 台東走出不一樣的能源道路。https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/4278614。 黃明堂（2023）。東縣推地熱發電 居民憂金崙溫泉水脈枯竭。https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/4483707。 黃金倪（2023）。業者草率開綠能說明會 金崙村民怒砲轟。https://news.ipcf.org.tw/90981。 黃雯娟、康培德（2008）。陽明山地區地名探源與調查研究。陽明山國家公園管理處委託研究報告（計畫編號：PG9703-0088 ）。 楊丞彧（2023）。核四現址何去何從？東北角居民要求速廢「核電廠」地目。https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/4491049。 經濟部（2023）。建物設置太陽光電、地熱專章 再生能源發展條例部分條文修正草案三讀通過。https://www.moea.gov.tw/Mns/populace/news/News.aspx?kind=1&menu_id=40&news_id=109933。 經濟部工業局（2017）。離岸風力發電產業關聯執行方案計畫書架構說明。2023年3月27日，取自：https://www.moeaidb.gov.tw/ctlr?PRO=policy.rwdPolicyView&id=5614 經濟部中央地質調查所（2022）。區域地熱探勘與重點潛能評估-花蓮縣萬榮鄉瑞林-紅葉地區期末報告。 經濟部能源局（2022）。「離岸風力發電區塊開發第一期容量分配結果」公告。2022年4月16日，取自：https://www.moeaboe.gov.tw/ECW/populace/Law/Content.aspx?menu_id=21988 監察院（2018）。核四廠斷層多，廠址未符合美國核管會核能電廠選址準則規定？ 監察委員田秋堇、趙永清、林盛豐申請自動調查。https://www.cy.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=796&s=13243。 劉光瑩（2021）。台灣地小人稠的痛點，為何被比爾蓋茲、貝佐斯投資的公司看上？https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5114679。 劉華真（2023）。因核而生？ 台灣與南韓的核能開發體制（1960s-1990s）。https://www.ios.sinica.edu.tw/journal/ts-comingsoon/ts44/ts44_p1.pdf。 盧太城（2023）。台東首座商轉民營地熱發電廠 每日可供900戶用電。https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E5%8F%B0%E6%9D%B1%E9%A6%96%E5%BA%A7%E5%95%86%E8%BD%89%E6%B0%91%E7%87%9F%E5%9C%B0%E7%86%B1%E7%99%BC%E9%9B%BB%E5%BB%A0-%E6%AF%8F%E6%97%A5%E5%8F%AF%E4%BE%9B900%E6%88%B6%E7%94%A8%E9%9B%BB-081853128.html。 二、外文文獻 A. Cherp, V. Vinichenko, J. Jewell, E. Brutschin, B. Sovacool, Integrating techno- economic, socio-technical and political perspectives on national energy transitions: A meta-theoretical framework, Energy Res. Social Sci. 37 (2018) 175–190, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.015. A. Weinrub, A. Giancatarino (2015). Toward a Climate Justice Energy Platform: Democratizing Our Energy Future. https://www.localcleanenergy.org/files/Climate%20Justice%20Energy%20Platform.pdf Aitken, M. (2010). Wind power and community benefits: Challenges and opportunities. Energy policy, 38(10), 6066-6075. Barich, A., Stoklosa, A.W., Hildebrand, J., Elíasson, O., Medgyes, T., Quinonez, G.m Casillas, A.C. & Fernandez, I. (2021). Social License to Operate in Geothermal Energy. Energies, 15(1), 139. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/1/139. Bavdek, J., Šinigoj, M., & Kumelj, S. (2019). Danube Region Geothermal Information Platform (DRGIP) User’s Manual. https://www.darlinge.eu/data/user_manuals/D.4.2.2.%20DRGIP%20Users'%20manual.pdf Bonciani, D., Barich, A., Vichi, M., Pippuchi, A., & Torsello, L. (2023). Communicating geothermal geoscience results to improve public policies and social acceptance of geothermal energy. European Geologist, 56. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10463545 Ibrohim, A., Prasetyo, R. M., & Rekinagara, I. H. (2019, April). Understanding social acceptance of geothermal energy: a case study from Mt. Lawu, Indonesia. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 254, No. 1, p. 012009). IOP Publishing. Calzadilla, P.V. & Mauger, R. (2018). The UN's new sustainable development agenda and renewable energy: the challenge to reach SDG7 while achieving energy justice. Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law, 36(2), 233-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646811.2017.1377951 Carr-Cornish, S., Romanach, L. & Huddlestone-Holmes, C. (2019). An Application of Social Science to Inform the Stakeholder Engagement of an Emerging Geothermal Industry in Australia. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78286-7_6 Carr-Cornish, S., Romanach, L.M. & Huddlestone-Holmes, C. (2019). An Application of Social Science to Inform the Stakeholder Engagement of an Emerging Geothermal Industry in Australia. In Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (Ed.), Geothermal energy and public engagement (71-90). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78286-7_6 Cass, N., Walker, G., & Devine-Wright, P. (2010). Good neighbours, public relations and bribes: the politics and perceptions of community benefit provision in renewable energy development in the UK. Journal of environmental policy & planning, 12(3), 255-275. Cataldi, R. (2001). Social acceptance of geothermal projects: problems and costs. Proc. European Summer School on Geothermal Energy Applications. Oradea/RO, 343-351. Centre for Sustainable Energy (2007). Garrad Hassan and Partners Ltd., Peter Capener and Bond Pearce LLP, 2007. Delivering community benefits from wind energy development: a toolkit. Report for the Renewables Advisory Board and DTI. Chavot, P., Masseran, A., Bodin, C., Serrano, Y., & Zoungrana, J. (2019). Geothermal energy in France. A resource fairly accepted for heating but controversial for high-energy power plants. Geothermal energy and society, 105-122. Ciplet, D. (2021). From energy privilege to energy justice: A framework for embedded sustainable development. Energy Research & Social Science, 75, 101996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.101996 Cousse, J., Trutnevyte, E. & Hahnel, U.J.J. (2021). Tell me how you feel about geothermal energy: Affect as a revealing factor of the role of seismic risk on public acceptance. 6, June, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112547. De Jesus, A. C. (1995). Socio-economic impacts of geothermal development. In Brown, KL (convenor), Environmental aspects of geothermal development. World Geothermal Congress (pp. 57-78). Devine-Wright, P. (2011). Public engagement with large-scale renewable energy technologies: breaking the cycle of NIMBYism. https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/wcc.89 Peliizzone, A. & Allansdott, A. (2019). Drawing the Picture: Public Engagement Experiences as Tools Towards an Emerging Framework. In Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (Ed.), Geothermal energy and public engagement. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78286-7_5 Duda, J. (2015). Energy, democracy, community. https://www.socioeco.org/bdf_fiche-document-4078_en.html ECOSOC (2016).The Sustainable Development Goals Report。https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2016/. Europe Union (2019a). Clean energy for all Europeans. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b4e46873-7528-11e9-9f05-01aa75ed71a1/language-en?WT.mc_id=Searchresult&WT.ria_c=null&WT.ria_f=3608&WT.ria_ev=search Europe Union (2019b). The European Green Deal. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1588580774040&uri=CELEX%3A52019DC0640 Farrell, J. (2016). Beyond sharing: how communities can take ownership of renewable power (energy democracy initiative). https://neweconomy.net/report-beyond-sharing-how-communities-can-take-ownership-of-renewable-power/ Florino, D. (1990). Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 15(2), 226-243. Fortun, K. (2012). Ethnography in late industrialism. Cultural Anthropology, 27(3), 446-464. Gatzert, N. & Kosub, T. (2016). Risks and risk management of renewable energy projects: The case of onshore and offshore wind parks. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 60, 982-998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.103 Geels, F.W., Sovacool, B.K. Schwanen, T., & Sorrell, S. (2017). Joule, 1(3), 463-479. Grin, J., Rotmans, J. & Schot, J. (2010). Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change. Routledge. Gurabardhi, Z., Gutteling, J. M., & Kuttschreuter, M. (2005). An empirical analysis of communication flow, strategy and stakeholders' participation in the risk communication literature 1988-2000. Journal of Risk Research, 8(6), 499-511. Guruswamy, L. (2010). Energy justice and sustainable development. https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1221&context=faculty-articles Healy, N. & Barry, J. (2017). Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: fossil fuel divestment and a just transition, Energy Policy, 108(C), 451–459. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.014. Hess, D. J. (2007). Alternative Pathways in Science and Industry: Activism, Innovation, and the Environment in an Era of Globalization. The MIT Press. Hicks, J. & Ison, N. (2018). An exploration of the boundaries of ‘community’ in community renewable energy projects: Navigating between motivations and context. Energy Policy, 113, 523-534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.031 Hildebrand, Jan, Jahns, Alena, Schwarz, Lea, & Barich, Amel. (2022). Public perceptions of Geothermal Projects – new ways of measuring and monitoring local acceptance and social impacts. European Geologist, 54. https://eurogeologists.eu/hildebrand-public-perceptions-of-geothermal-projects-new-ways-of-measuring-and-monitoring-local-acceptance-and-social-impacts/ Hoicka, C.E. & MacArthur, J.L., (2018)). From tip to toes: Mapping community energy models in Canada and New Zealand, Energy Policy,121(C), 162-174. Ibrohim, A., Prasetyo, R.M. & Rekinagara, I.H. (2019). Understanding Social Acceptance of Geothermal Energy: A Case Study from Mt. Lawu, Indonesia. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/254/1/012009. IRENA (2015). Rethinking Energy 2015. https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2015/IRENA-_REthinking_Energy_2nd_report_2015.pdf?rev=e5fefcc245de4ec1ac2ecdeb09ff9e07 J. Duda, Energy, Democracy, Community, (2015) https://medium.com/@JohnDuda/energy-democracy-community- 320660711cf4#.jtxijr47s J. Farrell, Beyond Sharing: How Communities can Take Ownership of Renewable Power (Energy Democracy Initiative), Institute for Local Self-Reliance, 2016 Retrieved from https://ilsr.org/report-beyond-sharing/. J. Hicks, N. Ison (2018). An exploration of the boundaries of ‘community’ in community renewable energy projects: navigating between motivations and context, Energy Policy 113, 523–534, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.031. Jami, A. A., & Walsh, P. R. (2017). From consultation to collaboration: A participatory framework for positive community engagement with wind energy projects in Ontario, Canada. Energy research & social science, 27, 14-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.02.007 Jolivet et al. (2002). General manual for the application of the ESTEEM tool. https://www.esteem-tool.eu/fileadmin/esteem-tool/docs/ESTEEMmanual.pdf. Jones, C. R., & Eiser, J. R. (2010). Understanding ‘local’opposition to wind development in the UK: how big is a backyard? Energy policy, 38(6), 3106-3117. Karytsas, S., Polyzou, O., & Karytsas, C. (2019). Social aspects of geothermal energy in Greece. In Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (Ed.), Geothermal energy and society, 123-144. Krupnik, S., Wagner, A., Vincent, O., Rudek, T., Wade, R., Mišík, M., Akerboom, S., Foulds, C., Smith S.K., Adem, Ç., Batel, S., Rabitz, F., Certomà, C., Chodkowska-Miszczuk, J., Denac, M., Dokupilová, D., Leiren, M., Ignatieva, M., Gabaldón-Estevan, D., & von Wirth, T. (2022). Beyond technology: A research agenda for social sciences and humanities research on renewable energy in Europe. Energy Research & Social Science. 89. 102536. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102536 L. Guruswamy, Energy justice and sustainable development, Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y 21 (2010) 231. Loorbach, D., Frantzeskaki, N. & Avelino, F. (2017). Sustainability Transitions Research: Transforming Science and Practice for Societal Change. Annual Review of Environmental Resources, 42(1), 599-626. M.J. Burke, J.C. Stephens, Political power and renewable energy futures: A critical review, Energy Res. Social Sci. 35 (2018) 78–93, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss. 2017.10.018. Macdonald, C., Glass, J., & Creamer, E. (2017). What is the benefit of community benefits? Exploring local perceptions of the provision of community benefits from a commercial wind energy project. Scottish Geographical Journal, 133(3-4), 172-191. Malo, M., Malo, F., Bédard, K. & Raymond, J. (2018). Public Perception Regarding Deep Geothermal Energy and Social Acceptability in the Province of Québec, Canada. In Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (Ed.), Geothermal energy and public engagement (91-103). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78286-7_7 Manzella, A., Allansdottir, A., & Pellizzone, A. (Eds.). (2019). Geothermal energy and society. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Meirbekova, R., Bonciani, D., Olafsson, D. I., Korucan, A., Derin-Güre, P., Harcouët-Menou, V., & Bero, W. (2024). Opportunities and Challenges of Geothermal Energy: A Comparative Analysis of Three European Cases—Belgium, Iceland, and Italy. Energies, 17(16), 4134. Miranda Fricker, Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007. Muslihudin, M., Santosa, I., Tugiyanti, E., Suyono, S., Dewi, P. S., & Santoso, J. (2023). The Urgency of Social Aspects in Environmental Assessment: A Case Study of a Sustainable Geothermal Power Plant Development in Banyumas, Indonesia. Environmental Research. Engineering and Management, 79(2), 88-98. Healy, N., & Barry, J. (2017). Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment and a “just transition”. Energy policy, 108, 451-459. Nixon, R. (2011). Slow violence and the environmentalism of the poor. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674061194 Office of Energy Efficiencey & Renewable Energy (2017). Energy Literacy: Essential Principles for Energy Education. https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/energy-literacy-essential-principles-energy-education Ottinger, G. (2013). The Winds of Change: Environmental Justice in Energy Transitions. Science as Culture, 22(2), 222-229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2013.786996 Pidgeon, N., Demski, C., Butler, C., Parkhill, K., & Spence, A. (2014). Creating a national citizen engagement process for energy policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111 Suppl 4 (Suppl 4), 13606–13613. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317512111 Proctor, R. N. (2008) Agnotology: A missing term to describe the cultural production of ignorance (and its Study). Stanford University Press. REN21 (2015), Renewables 2015, global status report. www.ren21.net/gsr. Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (2018). Risk Governance: Application to Urban Challenges. International journal of disaster risk science, 9(4), 434-444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13753-018-0196-3 Schlosberg, D. (2007). Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. Oxford University Press. Shan, L., Regan, A., Wall, P. & McConnon, A. (2014). Exploring online mechanisms of public engagement in risk communication: Insights from the European FoodRisC project. 13th International Public Communication of Science and Technology Conference 5-8 May 2014, Salvador, Brazil. Slamet, U., & Moelyono, D. G. (2000, May). Maximizing community benefits and minimizing environmental impacts in the Gunung Salak geothermal project, Indonesia. In Proceedings World Geothermal Congress, Japan (pp. 689-93). Sovacool, B.K (2014). What are we doing here? Analyzing fifteen years of energy scholarship and proposing a social science research agenda. Energy research & social science, 1(1), 1-29. Springer, S. & Le Billon, P. (2016). Violence and space: An introduction to the geographies of violence. Political geography, 52(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2016.03.003 Stephens, J. C. (2019). Energy Democracy: Redistributing Power to the People Through Renewable Transformation. Environment: science and policy for sustainable development, 61(2), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.2019.1564212 Sweeney, S. (2014). Working Toward Energy Democracy. In Worldwatch Institute (Ed.), State of the World 2014 (215-227). https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-61091-542-7_20 Swofford, J., & Slattery, M. (2010). Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: Local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making. Energy policy, 38(5), 2508-2519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.046 Szulecki, K. & Overland, I. (2018). Energy democracy as a process, an outcome and a goal: a conceptual review. Energy Research & Social Science, 69, 101768. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101768 Szulecki, K. (2018). Conceptualizing energy democracy. Environmental politics, 27(1), 21-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2017.1387294 Tully, S. (2008). The human right to access clean energy. Journal of Green Building, 3(2), 140-148. Turnpenny, J., Lorenzoni, I. & Jones, M. (2009). Environmental Science & Policy, 12(3), 347-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.01.004 U.S. Department of Energy (2004). Geothermal technology program: enhanced geothermal systems. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36317.pdf Uechi, J., Murayama, T., & Nishikizawa, S. (2013). An Analysis of Factors Influencing Community Acceptance on Geothermal Power Development-the Cases of Yanaizu-Nishiyama and Oguni Geothermal Power Plants. Papers on Environmental Information Science, 283-288. Walker, G., & Devine-Wright, P. (2008). Community renewable energy: What should it mean? Energy policy, 36(2), 497-500. Wallquist, L., & Holenstein, M. (2015, April). Engaging the public on geothermal energy. In World Geothermal Congress (pp. 19-25). Warren, C. R., & Birnie, R. V. (2009). Re-powering Scotland: wind farms and the ‘energy or environment?’Debate. Scottish geographical journal, 125(2), 97-126. Weinrub. A. & Giancatarino, A. (2015). Toward a Climate Justice Energy Platform: Democratizing Our Energy Future. https://ccednet-rcdec.ca/resource/toward-a-climate-justice-energy-platform-democratizing-our-energy-future/ Wolsink, M. (2007). Wind power implementation: The nature of public attitudes: Equity and fairness instead of ‘backyard motives’. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 11(6),1188-1207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2005.10.005 Wolsink, M. (2012). The research agenda on social acceptance of distributed generation in smart grids: Renewable as common pool resources. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 16(1), 822-835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.09.006 Wüstenhagen, R., Wolsink, M., & Bürer, M. J. (2007). Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy policy, 35(5), 2683-2691. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政學系
110256016資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110256016 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 杜文苓 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Tu, Wen-Ling en_US dc.contributor.author (作者) 郭彥廷 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (作者) Kuo, Yen-Ting en_US dc.creator (作者) 郭彥廷 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Kuo, Yen-Ting en_US dc.date (日期) 2024 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-十一月-2024 11:06:06 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-十一月-2024 11:06:06 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-十一月-2024 11:06:06 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0110256016 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/154207 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 公共行政學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 110256016 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 在邁向更為淨零、永續社會的路程中，再生能源成為全球各國極力發展的建設項目。在發展再生能源的同時，除了改善環境現況，也希望能夠促進更為公正、正義的社會，建立一個有別於傳統化石燃料能源壟斷、集中的決策模式，重視能源與地方的互動、關注社區福祉並促進居民的參與，這在許多國家包括臺灣皆在再生能源相關政策中都有著墨。然而發展至今，仍能發現過去能源建設造成的環境、社會傷害的景象發生於再生能源的發展之中。在許多案例中，也看到了能源與地方社區的衝突，除了地方的環境衝擊，也包括了利害關係人參與、溝通的程序不利居民參與，或是對於能源發展的不同想像難以交集。 關於再生能源的研究多半聚焦於技術、經濟面向，關於社會議題的探討卻僅佔少數，過去的公共行政領域也較少對其投入關注。再生能源政策主要由國家中央層級制定，然而真正落實之處在於地方，為了使其能夠更順利地推行，有效地與社會共榮共存，在地社群的接受程度便是計畫成敗的關鍵。在此之中，我們看到了再生能源發展是一項跨學科（transdisciplinary）議題，以及社會科學所扮演的重要角色。 憑藉先天的自然條件優勢，以及技術、成本問題逐漸被克服的情況下，近年來地熱在臺灣的成長快速，至今被列為我國重點發展的前瞻能源之一，在許多地區也正進行探勘、建廠作業。有別於常見的風電、光電，地熱的規模較小、基載特性使其在未來發展上可能走出不同的路徑。然而與其他能源相同的是，地熱的開發仍須面臨風險控管以及如何使地方居民共同參與、利益共享等問題。除了國外，近年在臺灣也曾經發生與地熱能相關的地方社會爭議。 是故，本研究援引了能源民主（energy democracy）及社會接受（social acceptance）之概念，以地熱能發展的角度切入出發，並以臺灣北海岸地區作為主要研究場域。北海岸地區具有近半世紀的能源發展史，我國許多重要的能源設施皆建於此地，如火力（協和電廠）、核能（核一、核二、核四廠）、離岸風力等。然而在發展的同時也伴隨著許多爭議以及不公。近期位於大屯山地區的四磺子坪先導地熱廠正式啟用，其所屬的硫磺子坪地熱能示範區也開始動土，這意味著未來地熱亦有可能在北海岸地區有更多的發展。本文透過深度訪談，瞭解民間組織及地方社群對於地熱的認知與想像，並探討有什麼樣的機制與方法能促進居民在能源方面的決策參與並從中受益。藉由個案研究的方式，希望能夠給予未來臺灣在再生能源的社會基礎建設方面給予啟示，並精進當前的溝通、參與機制，以更加落實公平與正義。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) In the journey towards a cleaner, zero-emission, and sustainable society, renewable energy has become a major construction project vigorously pursued by countries worldwide. While developing renewable energy aims to improve environmental conditions, there is also a desire to promote a more just and equitable society. This involves establishing a decision-making model distinct from the traditional fossil fuel energy monopoly and concentration, emphasizing the interaction between energy and localities, focusing on community well-being, and promoting resident participation. Many countries, including Taiwan, address these aspects in their renewable energy policies. However, despite the progress, one can still observe environmental and social damage occurring in the development of renewable energy, reminiscent of the issues caused by conventional energy construction. Most research on renewable energy predominantly focuses on technical and economic aspects, with limited discussion on social issues. Public administration has historically shown less interest in this field. While renewable energy policies are primarily formulated at the national level, their successful implementation depends on local acceptance. The willingness of local communities to embrace these projects is crucial for their success. Within this context, the development of renewable energy emerges as a transdisciplinary issue, with a significant role played by the social sciences. Benefiting from inherent natural advantages and overcoming technological and cost-related challenges, geothermal energy has witnessed rapid growth in Taiwan in recent years. It is now considered one of the country's key prospective energy sources, with exploration and construction activities taking place in various regions. Unlike more common wind and solar energy sources, geothermal energy's smaller scale and baseload characteristics may pave the way for different development paths in the future. However, like other energy sources, geothermal development still faces challenges such as risk management and addressing issues related to local residents' participation and benefit-sharing. In recent years, disputes related to geothermal energy have also occurred in Taiwan. This study draws on the concepts of energy democracy and social acceptance, focusing on the perspective of geothermal energy development and using the northern coast of Taiwan as the primary research area. The northern coast has a history of nearly half a century in energy development, hosting crucial energy facilities such as thermal power plants, nuclear power plants, and offshore wind farms. However, along with development, numerous controversies and injustices have arisen. The recently inaugurated Sulfur Creek Pilot Geothermal Plant in Datun Mountain area indicates the potential for further geothermal development on the northern coast. Through in-depth interviews, this research aims to understand the perceptions and imaginations of civil organizations and local communities regarding geothermal energy. It explores mechanisms and methods that can enhance residents' proactive participation and decision-making in energy matters for their benefit. By adopting a case study approach, the hope is to provide insights for Taiwan's future social infrastructure in renewable energy, suggesting ways to improve current communication and participation mechanisms to achieve greater fairness and justice. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 研究動機與目的 1 第二章 文獻回顧 34 第三章 研究設計 65 第四章 萬里金山地區對地熱的想像 75 第五章 促進能源民主與社會接受的關鍵要素 104 第六章 結論與建議 118 參考文獻 128 附錄一、受訪者知情同意 146 附錄二、訪綱設計 148 zh_TW dc.format.extent 20195120 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110256016 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 能源民主 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 社會接受 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 再生能源 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 地熱 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Energy democracy en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) social acceptance en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) renewable energy en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) geothermal energy en_US dc.title (題名) 臺灣能源轉型的民主挑戰：以萬里金山對地熱能發展的社會接受為啟示 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The Democratic Challenges of Taiwan's Energy Transition: Insights from the Social Acceptance of Geothermal Development in Wanli and Jinshan en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文文獻 尤聰光（2023）。台東地熱發電啟動 每日供電900戶。https://www.re.org.tw/news/more.aspx?cid=198&id=5902。 尤聰光（2023）。地熱發電惹禍？天災改變泉脈？ 金崙野溪溫泉乾涸謎團待解。https://udn.com/news/story/7328/7657748?fbclid=IwAR0n3m58wFGZdTygxGM_OLpRgByCUzdNyZVDXcLFan_h_wWi184xyHXXHVw。 尤聰光（2024）。台東「地熱」綠能勢不可擋 工研院紅葉探勘有進展。https://www.re.org.tw/news/more.aspx?cid=198&id=6743 文傑格達德班（2017）。廠商擬金崙蓋發電廠 部落說明多數民不知情。https://www.tipp.org.tw/news_article.asp?F_ID=81079&FT_No=1。 王舜薇（2022）。社區電廠如何成為支持體系？參訪北海岸金山「翡翠一號」電廠。https://rsprc.ntu.edu.tw/zh-tw/m01-3/en-trans/1675-0222-community-renewable.html。 田秋堇、蔡崇義、賴振昌（2019）。核四仲裁案 調查報告。https://www-ws.cy.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMy9yZWxmaWxlLzg5MTIvMjE5NTIvOTk4ZGFlYjYtMGUxNC00ZGJlLThlN2EtNjM1Y2Y3ZDRhOGE1LnBkZg%3D%3D&n=5qC45Zub5Luy6KOB5qGI6Kq%2F5p%2Bl5aCx5ZGK6KiY6ICF5pyD57Ch5aCxLnBkZg%3D%3D。 江櫻梅（2021）。阿母的買菜之路：核電陰影下的金山小鎮。https://opinion.cw.com.tw/blog/profile/52/article/11056。 行政院（2019a）。離岸風電推動現況與展望。2023年3月15日，取自：https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/448DE008087A1971/a26c4710-7e36-4d89-94f2-593f73a47452 行政院（2019b）。風力發電4年推動計畫。2023年3月26日，取自：https://www.moeaboe.gov.tw/ECW/populace/content/ContentDesc.aspx?menu_id=5493 吳天明（2017）。台電在台灣本島及離島推動風力發電概況報導。https://web.archive.org/web/20190701063241/http://dept.taipower.com.tw/yuan/yuan_91/yuan_pdf/91_2.pdf。 吳佩蓉（2022）。投入8億！宜蘭清水電廠商轉，11年後才回本。https://esg.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/180694/post/202203290034。 吳瀛洲（2023）。新北首座地熱發電廠 10月完工商轉。https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E6%96%B0%E5%8C%97%E9%A6%96%E5%BA%A7%E5%9C%B0%E7%86%B1%E7%99%BC%E9%9B%BB%E5%BB%A0-10%E6%9C%88%E5%AE%8C%E5%B7%A5%E5%95%86%E8%BD%89-133820101.html。 宋聖榮、盧乙嘉、劉佳枚、張竝瑜（2015）。台灣地熱潛能、現況和發展困境。石油季刊，51（1），61-82。 李亨山（2018）。說明會疑有瑕疵 金崙地熱發電廠補件再審。https://www.cna.com.tw/news/ahel/201803070171.aspx。 李若慈（2016）。看見核電廠旁，「它核他們的故事」。https://opinion.cw.com.tw/blog/profile/52/article/11724。 李清瑞、江道義、陳榮輝 (1994) 。台灣地熱探勘資料彙整。 李蘇竣（2022）。核一廠除役拆除要蓋低放貯存庫 地方說明會引居民反彈。https://e-info.org.tw/node/235807。 汪志宏（2020）。紅葉部落地熱鑽探爆民怨 反地熱自救聯盟至縣府抗議陳情。https://old.hsnews.com.tw/life/7904-%e7%b4%85%e8%91%89%e9%83%a8%e8%90%bd%e5%9c%b0%e7%86%b1%e9%91%bd%e6%8e%a2%e7%88%86%e6%b0%91%e6%80%a8-%e5%8f%8d%e5%9c%b0%e7%86%b1%e8%87%aa%e6%95%91%e8%81%af%e7%9b%9f%e8%87%b3%e7%b8%a3%e5%ba%9c%e6%8a%97%e8%ad%b0%e9%99%b3%e6%83%85。 林吉洋（2020a）。震動的紅葉部落01》地熱鑽探干擾村民爆爭議，縣府稱私有地不需經部落同意，環團批法規模糊。https://www.newsmarket.com.tw/blog/140146/ 林吉洋（2020b）。震動的紅葉部落02》他們為什麼反地熱？中生代覺醒參戰，拒絕外力決定部落命運。https://www.newsmarket.com.tw/blog/140143/ 林孟汝、林淑媛（2018）。伴台灣走過40年風華 核一功成身退。https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/201812020017.aspx。 林雨佑（2022）。當光電包圍漁村：七股漁電共生風波再起，居民在抗議什麼？ https://www.twreporter.org/a/qigu-fishery-electricity-symbiosis 林錦仁（2000）。宜蘭清水地熱開發之探討。石油季刊，36（1），29-38。 花孟璟（2020）。遭花蓮紅葉部落控告偽文 地熱業者否認：私有地開發免諮商同意。https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/3371667。 花蓮縣議會（2020）。本會召開「針對縣內萬榮鄉紅葉村地熱開發發展之執行進度」之專案會議。https://www.hlcc.gov.tw/news_detail.php?index_no=410。 國家發展委員會（2022）。國家融資保證機制推動方案。 國家發展委員會（2022）。臺灣2050淨零排放路徑及策略總說明。https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=DEE68AAD8B38BD76 國家發展委員會（2022）。臺灣2050淨零排放路徑及策略總說明。https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=DEE68AAD8B38BD76。 國發會（2020）。國家融資保證機制係為協助國內業者而非為外商融資。2023年3月26日，取自：https://www.ndc.gov.tw/nc_8456_34445。 張岱屏（2014）。不核作的選擇。https://ourisland.pts.org.tw/content/1584。 張岱屏（2021）。當核電退役時｜核廢料該安置在哪裡？https://ourisland.pts.org.tw/content/8070。 章明哲（2022）。台東金崙地下水位突降10公尺 縣府初判6月連續地震所致。https://news.pts.org.tw/article/590383。 陳俊碩（2020）。花蓮地熱開發案引部落抗議 縣府盼互惠求雙贏。https://www.cna.com.tw/news/aloc/202010140184.aspx。 陳彥仲（2018）。設置離岸風力發電機現行法規及對審議機制之建議。https://learnenergy.tw/index.php?inter=knowledge&caid=4&id=340 陳昭宏、李蘇竣（2022）。【整理包】離岸風場競逐區塊開發：首輪選商、生態爭議、新興工法一次。2023年4月16日，取自：https://esg.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/180692/post/202210120016/%E3%80%90%E6%95%B4%E7%90%86%E5%8C%85%E3%80%91%E9%9B%A2%E5%B2%B8%E9%A2%A8%E5%A0%B4%E7%AB%B6%E9%80%90%E5%8D%80%E5%A1%8A%E9%96%8B%E7%99%BC%EF%BC%9A%E9%A6%96%E8%BC%AA%E9%81%B8%E5%95%86%E3%80%81%E7%94%9F%E6%85%8B%E7%88%AD%E8%AD%B0%E3%80%81%E6%96%B0%E8%88%88%E5%B7%A5%E6%B3%95%E4%B8%80%E6%AC%A1%E7%9C%8B 陳美蘭、張永源、連永順（2022）。離岸風力發電發展趨勢與展望。 陳賢義（2023）。首座地熱發電廠穩定輸出 台東走出不一樣的能源道路。https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/4278614。 黃明堂（2023）。東縣推地熱發電 居民憂金崙溫泉水脈枯竭。https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/4483707。 黃金倪（2023）。業者草率開綠能說明會 金崙村民怒砲轟。https://news.ipcf.org.tw/90981。 黃雯娟、康培德（2008）。陽明山地區地名探源與調查研究。陽明山國家公園管理處委託研究報告（計畫編號：PG9703-0088 ）。 楊丞彧（2023）。核四現址何去何從？東北角居民要求速廢「核電廠」地目。https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/4491049。 經濟部（2023）。建物設置太陽光電、地熱專章 再生能源發展條例部分條文修正草案三讀通過。https://www.moea.gov.tw/Mns/populace/news/News.aspx?kind=1&menu_id=40&news_id=109933。 經濟部工業局（2017）。離岸風力發電產業關聯執行方案計畫書架構說明。2023年3月27日，取自：https://www.moeaidb.gov.tw/ctlr?PRO=policy.rwdPolicyView&id=5614 經濟部中央地質調查所（2022）。區域地熱探勘與重點潛能評估-花蓮縣萬榮鄉瑞林-紅葉地區期末報告。 經濟部能源局（2022）。「離岸風力發電區塊開發第一期容量分配結果」公告。2022年4月16日，取自：https://www.moeaboe.gov.tw/ECW/populace/Law/Content.aspx?menu_id=21988 監察院（2018）。核四廠斷層多，廠址未符合美國核管會核能電廠選址準則規定？ 監察委員田秋堇、趙永清、林盛豐申請自動調查。https://www.cy.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=796&s=13243。 劉光瑩（2021）。台灣地小人稠的痛點，為何被比爾蓋茲、貝佐斯投資的公司看上？https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5114679。 劉華真（2023）。因核而生？ 台灣與南韓的核能開發體制（1960s-1990s）。https://www.ios.sinica.edu.tw/journal/ts-comingsoon/ts44/ts44_p1.pdf。 盧太城（2023）。台東首座商轉民營地熱發電廠 每日可供900戶用電。https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E5%8F%B0%E6%9D%B1%E9%A6%96%E5%BA%A7%E5%95%86%E8%BD%89%E6%B0%91%E7%87%9F%E5%9C%B0%E7%86%B1%E7%99%BC%E9%9B%BB%E5%BB%A0-%E6%AF%8F%E6%97%A5%E5%8F%AF%E4%BE%9B900%E6%88%B6%E7%94%A8%E9%9B%BB-081853128.html。 二、外文文獻 A. Cherp, V. Vinichenko, J. Jewell, E. Brutschin, B. Sovacool, Integrating techno- economic, socio-technical and political perspectives on national energy transitions: A meta-theoretical framework, Energy Res. Social Sci. 37 (2018) 175–190, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.015. A. Weinrub, A. Giancatarino (2015). Toward a Climate Justice Energy Platform: Democratizing Our Energy Future. https://www.localcleanenergy.org/files/Climate%20Justice%20Energy%20Platform.pdf Aitken, M. (2010). Wind power and community benefits: Challenges and opportunities. Energy policy, 38(10), 6066-6075. Barich, A., Stoklosa, A.W., Hildebrand, J., Elíasson, O., Medgyes, T., Quinonez, G.m Casillas, A.C. & Fernandez, I. (2021). Social License to Operate in Geothermal Energy. Energies, 15(1), 139. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/1/139. Bavdek, J., Šinigoj, M., & Kumelj, S. (2019). Danube Region Geothermal Information Platform (DRGIP) User’s Manual. https://www.darlinge.eu/data/user_manuals/D.4.2.2.%20DRGIP%20Users'%20manual.pdf Bonciani, D., Barich, A., Vichi, M., Pippuchi, A., & Torsello, L. (2023). Communicating geothermal geoscience results to improve public policies and social acceptance of geothermal energy. European Geologist, 56. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10463545 Ibrohim, A., Prasetyo, R. M., & Rekinagara, I. H. (2019, April). Understanding social acceptance of geothermal energy: a case study from Mt. Lawu, Indonesia. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 254, No. 1, p. 012009). IOP Publishing. Calzadilla, P.V. & Mauger, R. (2018). The UN's new sustainable development agenda and renewable energy: the challenge to reach SDG7 while achieving energy justice. Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law, 36(2), 233-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646811.2017.1377951 Carr-Cornish, S., Romanach, L. & Huddlestone-Holmes, C. (2019). An Application of Social Science to Inform the Stakeholder Engagement of an Emerging Geothermal Industry in Australia. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78286-7_6 Carr-Cornish, S., Romanach, L.M. & Huddlestone-Holmes, C. (2019). An Application of Social Science to Inform the Stakeholder Engagement of an Emerging Geothermal Industry in Australia. In Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (Ed.), Geothermal energy and public engagement (71-90). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78286-7_6 Cass, N., Walker, G., & Devine-Wright, P. (2010). Good neighbours, public relations and bribes: the politics and perceptions of community benefit provision in renewable energy development in the UK. Journal of environmental policy & planning, 12(3), 255-275. Cataldi, R. (2001). Social acceptance of geothermal projects: problems and costs. Proc. European Summer School on Geothermal Energy Applications. Oradea/RO, 343-351. Centre for Sustainable Energy (2007). Garrad Hassan and Partners Ltd., Peter Capener and Bond Pearce LLP, 2007. Delivering community benefits from wind energy development: a toolkit. Report for the Renewables Advisory Board and DTI. Chavot, P., Masseran, A., Bodin, C., Serrano, Y., & Zoungrana, J. (2019). Geothermal energy in France. A resource fairly accepted for heating but controversial for high-energy power plants. Geothermal energy and society, 105-122. Ciplet, D. (2021). From energy privilege to energy justice: A framework for embedded sustainable development. Energy Research & Social Science, 75, 101996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.101996 Cousse, J., Trutnevyte, E. & Hahnel, U.J.J. (2021). Tell me how you feel about geothermal energy: Affect as a revealing factor of the role of seismic risk on public acceptance. 6, June, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112547. De Jesus, A. C. (1995). Socio-economic impacts of geothermal development. In Brown, KL (convenor), Environmental aspects of geothermal development. World Geothermal Congress (pp. 57-78). Devine-Wright, P. (2011). Public engagement with large-scale renewable energy technologies: breaking the cycle of NIMBYism. https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/wcc.89 Peliizzone, A. & Allansdott, A. (2019). Drawing the Picture: Public Engagement Experiences as Tools Towards an Emerging Framework. In Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (Ed.), Geothermal energy and public engagement. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78286-7_5 Duda, J. (2015). Energy, democracy, community. https://www.socioeco.org/bdf_fiche-document-4078_en.html ECOSOC (2016).The Sustainable Development Goals Report。https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2016/. Europe Union (2019a). Clean energy for all Europeans. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b4e46873-7528-11e9-9f05-01aa75ed71a1/language-en?WT.mc_id=Searchresult&WT.ria_c=null&WT.ria_f=3608&WT.ria_ev=search Europe Union (2019b). The European Green Deal. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1588580774040&uri=CELEX%3A52019DC0640 Farrell, J. (2016). Beyond sharing: how communities can take ownership of renewable power (energy democracy initiative). https://neweconomy.net/report-beyond-sharing-how-communities-can-take-ownership-of-renewable-power/ Florino, D. (1990). Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 15(2), 226-243. Fortun, K. (2012). Ethnography in late industrialism. Cultural Anthropology, 27(3), 446-464. Gatzert, N. & Kosub, T. (2016). Risks and risk management of renewable energy projects: The case of onshore and offshore wind parks. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 60, 982-998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.103 Geels, F.W., Sovacool, B.K. Schwanen, T., & Sorrell, S. (2017). Joule, 1(3), 463-479. Grin, J., Rotmans, J. & Schot, J. (2010). Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change. Routledge. Gurabardhi, Z., Gutteling, J. M., & Kuttschreuter, M. (2005). An empirical analysis of communication flow, strategy and stakeholders' participation in the risk communication literature 1988-2000. Journal of Risk Research, 8(6), 499-511. Guruswamy, L. (2010). Energy justice and sustainable development. https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1221&context=faculty-articles Healy, N. & Barry, J. (2017). Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: fossil fuel divestment and a just transition, Energy Policy, 108(C), 451–459. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.014. Hess, D. J. (2007). Alternative Pathways in Science and Industry: Activism, Innovation, and the Environment in an Era of Globalization. The MIT Press. Hicks, J. & Ison, N. (2018). An exploration of the boundaries of ‘community’ in community renewable energy projects: Navigating between motivations and context. Energy Policy, 113, 523-534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.031 Hildebrand, Jan, Jahns, Alena, Schwarz, Lea, & Barich, Amel. (2022). Public perceptions of Geothermal Projects – new ways of measuring and monitoring local acceptance and social impacts. European Geologist, 54. https://eurogeologists.eu/hildebrand-public-perceptions-of-geothermal-projects-new-ways-of-measuring-and-monitoring-local-acceptance-and-social-impacts/ Hoicka, C.E. & MacArthur, J.L., (2018)). From tip to toes: Mapping community energy models in Canada and New Zealand, Energy Policy,121(C), 162-174. Ibrohim, A., Prasetyo, R.M. & Rekinagara, I.H. (2019). Understanding Social Acceptance of Geothermal Energy: A Case Study from Mt. Lawu, Indonesia. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/254/1/012009. IRENA (2015). Rethinking Energy 2015. https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2015/IRENA-_REthinking_Energy_2nd_report_2015.pdf?rev=e5fefcc245de4ec1ac2ecdeb09ff9e07 J. Duda, Energy, Democracy, Community, (2015) https://medium.com/@JohnDuda/energy-democracy-community- 320660711cf4#.jtxijr47s J. Farrell, Beyond Sharing: How Communities can Take Ownership of Renewable Power (Energy Democracy Initiative), Institute for Local Self-Reliance, 2016 Retrieved from https://ilsr.org/report-beyond-sharing/. J. Hicks, N. Ison (2018). An exploration of the boundaries of ‘community’ in community renewable energy projects: navigating between motivations and context, Energy Policy 113, 523–534, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.031. Jami, A. A., & Walsh, P. R. (2017). From consultation to collaboration: A participatory framework for positive community engagement with wind energy projects in Ontario, Canada. Energy research & social science, 27, 14-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.02.007 Jolivet et al. (2002). General manual for the application of the ESTEEM tool. https://www.esteem-tool.eu/fileadmin/esteem-tool/docs/ESTEEMmanual.pdf. Jones, C. R., & Eiser, J. R. (2010). Understanding ‘local’opposition to wind development in the UK: how big is a backyard? Energy policy, 38(6), 3106-3117. Karytsas, S., Polyzou, O., & Karytsas, C. (2019). Social aspects of geothermal energy in Greece. In Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (Ed.), Geothermal energy and society, 123-144. Krupnik, S., Wagner, A., Vincent, O., Rudek, T., Wade, R., Mišík, M., Akerboom, S., Foulds, C., Smith S.K., Adem, Ç., Batel, S., Rabitz, F., Certomà, C., Chodkowska-Miszczuk, J., Denac, M., Dokupilová, D., Leiren, M., Ignatieva, M., Gabaldón-Estevan, D., & von Wirth, T. (2022). Beyond technology: A research agenda for social sciences and humanities research on renewable energy in Europe. Energy Research & Social Science. 89. 102536. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102536 L. Guruswamy, Energy justice and sustainable development, Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y 21 (2010) 231. Loorbach, D., Frantzeskaki, N. & Avelino, F. (2017). Sustainability Transitions Research: Transforming Science and Practice for Societal Change. Annual Review of Environmental Resources, 42(1), 599-626. M.J. Burke, J.C. Stephens, Political power and renewable energy futures: A critical review, Energy Res. Social Sci. 35 (2018) 78–93, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss. 2017.10.018. Macdonald, C., Glass, J., & Creamer, E. (2017). What is the benefit of community benefits? Exploring local perceptions of the provision of community benefits from a commercial wind energy project. Scottish Geographical Journal, 133(3-4), 172-191. Malo, M., Malo, F., Bédard, K. & Raymond, J. (2018). Public Perception Regarding Deep Geothermal Energy and Social Acceptability in the Province of Québec, Canada. In Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (Ed.), Geothermal energy and public engagement (91-103). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78286-7_7 Manzella, A., Allansdottir, A., & Pellizzone, A. (Eds.). (2019). Geothermal energy and society. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Meirbekova, R., Bonciani, D., Olafsson, D. I., Korucan, A., Derin-Güre, P., Harcouët-Menou, V., & Bero, W. (2024). Opportunities and Challenges of Geothermal Energy: A Comparative Analysis of Three European Cases—Belgium, Iceland, and Italy. Energies, 17(16), 4134. Miranda Fricker, Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007. Muslihudin, M., Santosa, I., Tugiyanti, E., Suyono, S., Dewi, P. S., & Santoso, J. (2023). The Urgency of Social Aspects in Environmental Assessment: A Case Study of a Sustainable Geothermal Power Plant Development in Banyumas, Indonesia. Environmental Research. Engineering and Management, 79(2), 88-98. Healy, N., & Barry, J. (2017). Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment and a “just transition”. Energy policy, 108, 451-459. Nixon, R. (2011). Slow violence and the environmentalism of the poor. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674061194 Office of Energy Efficiencey & Renewable Energy (2017). Energy Literacy: Essential Principles for Energy Education. https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/energy-literacy-essential-principles-energy-education Ottinger, G. (2013). The Winds of Change: Environmental Justice in Energy Transitions. Science as Culture, 22(2), 222-229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2013.786996 Pidgeon, N., Demski, C., Butler, C., Parkhill, K., & Spence, A. (2014). Creating a national citizen engagement process for energy policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111 Suppl 4 (Suppl 4), 13606–13613. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317512111 Proctor, R. N. (2008) Agnotology: A missing term to describe the cultural production of ignorance (and its Study). Stanford University Press. REN21 (2015), Renewables 2015, global status report. www.ren21.net/gsr. Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Schweizer, P.J. (2018). Risk Governance: Application to Urban Challenges. International journal of disaster risk science, 9(4), 434-444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13753-018-0196-3 Schlosberg, D. (2007). Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. Oxford University Press. Shan, L., Regan, A., Wall, P. & McConnon, A. (2014). Exploring online mechanisms of public engagement in risk communication: Insights from the European FoodRisC project. 13th International Public Communication of Science and Technology Conference 5-8 May 2014, Salvador, Brazil. Slamet, U., & Moelyono, D. G. (2000, May). Maximizing community benefits and minimizing environmental impacts in the Gunung Salak geothermal project, Indonesia. In Proceedings World Geothermal Congress, Japan (pp. 689-93). Sovacool, B.K (2014). What are we doing here? Analyzing fifteen years of energy scholarship and proposing a social science research agenda. Energy research & social science, 1(1), 1-29. Springer, S. & Le Billon, P. (2016). Violence and space: An introduction to the geographies of violence. Political geography, 52(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2016.03.003 Stephens, J. C. (2019). Energy Democracy: Redistributing Power to the People Through Renewable Transformation. Environment: science and policy for sustainable development, 61(2), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.2019.1564212 Sweeney, S. (2014). Working Toward Energy Democracy. In Worldwatch Institute (Ed.), State of the World 2014 (215-227). https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-61091-542-7_20 Swofford, J., & Slattery, M. (2010). Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: Local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making. Energy policy, 38(5), 2508-2519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.046 Szulecki, K. & Overland, I. (2018). Energy democracy as a process, an outcome and a goal: a conceptual review. Energy Research & Social Science, 69, 101768. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101768 Szulecki, K. (2018). Conceptualizing energy democracy. Environmental politics, 27(1), 21-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2017.1387294 Tully, S. (2008). The human right to access clean energy. Journal of Green Building, 3(2), 140-148. Turnpenny, J., Lorenzoni, I. & Jones, M. (2009). Environmental Science & Policy, 12(3), 347-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.01.004 U.S. Department of Energy (2004). Geothermal technology program: enhanced geothermal systems. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36317.pdf Uechi, J., Murayama, T., & Nishikizawa, S. (2013). An Analysis of Factors Influencing Community Acceptance on Geothermal Power Development-the Cases of Yanaizu-Nishiyama and Oguni Geothermal Power Plants. Papers on Environmental Information Science, 283-288. Walker, G., & Devine-Wright, P. (2008). Community renewable energy: What should it mean? Energy policy, 36(2), 497-500. Wallquist, L., & Holenstein, M. (2015, April). Engaging the public on geothermal energy. In World Geothermal Congress (pp. 19-25). Warren, C. R., & Birnie, R. V. (2009). Re-powering Scotland: wind farms and the ‘energy or environment?’Debate. Scottish geographical journal, 125(2), 97-126. Weinrub. A. & Giancatarino, A. (2015). Toward a Climate Justice Energy Platform: Democratizing Our Energy Future. https://ccednet-rcdec.ca/resource/toward-a-climate-justice-energy-platform-democratizing-our-energy-future/ Wolsink, M. (2007). Wind power implementation: The nature of public attitudes: Equity and fairness instead of ‘backyard motives’. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 11(6),1188-1207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2005.10.005 Wolsink, M. (2012). The research agenda on social acceptance of distributed generation in smart grids: Renewable as common pool resources. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 16(1), 822-835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.09.006 Wüstenhagen, R., Wolsink, M., & Bürer, M. J. (2007). Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy policy, 35(5), 2683-2691. zh_TW
