Cost-benefit analysis for recycling of agricultural wastes in Taiwan

被引:45
|
作者
Hsu, Esher [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Taipei Univ, Dept Stat, 67 Sect 3,Min Sheng East Rd, Taipei 104, Taiwan
关键词
Agricultural waste; Recycling; Cost-benefit analysis; Compost; Biomass fuel; Biogas;
D O I
10.1016/j.wasman.2020.09.051
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Agricultural waste can be recycled in different ways. Cost-effectiveness is important information for investment decision-making of enterprises and policy-making of government to choose a profitable way to recycle agricultural waste. Therefore, this paper aims to present a cost-benefit analysis to assess and compare the cost-effectiveness between feasible recycling methods, and further propose cost-effective ways for recycling agricultural waste in Taiwan. Three recycling types of agricultural wastes, namely, composting, biogas power generation and biomass fuel are selected for cost-benefit analysis based on related regulations and policy supports of agricultural waste management in Taiwan. Primary data collected by sampling surveys conducted in 2018 supplemented by secondary data from national statistics are used for this study. Study results show that all three recycling types of agricultural wastes discussed in this study are profitable under corresponding economic conditions in 2018 with benefit/cost ratio greater than 1 and positive net present value; as expected, the cost-effectiveness of agricultural waste recycling varies depending on the recycling types, composition of input materials, and economic scales. Mixing chicken manure with other agricultural wastes for composting and using rice straw to make biomass fuel rods are estimated to have higher cost-effectiveness; livestock farms with small farming scale have relatively low biogas energy recovery efficiency; the cost-effectiveness of biogas power generation highly depends on fixed-in tariffs (FITs). Results imply that policy support for establishing co-processing centers of agricultural waste and differentiated FITs would be good measures to stimulate recycling efficiency of agricultural waste in Taiwan. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:424 / 432
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] EQUITY IN COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
    PEARCE, DW
    WISE, J
    JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT ECONOMICS AND POLICY, 1972, 6 (03) : 324 - 325
  • [22] Liraglutide: A Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Schoeffski, O.
    Mentrup, S.
    Lund, N.
    Pfuetzner, A.
    DIABETES STOFFWECHSEL UND HERZ, 2010, 19 (03): : 177 - 184
  • [23] Cognition and cost-benefit analysis
    Sunstein, CR
    JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES, 2000, 29 (02): : 1059 - 1103
  • [24] UNEMPLOYMENT AND COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
    BAXTER, ND
    HOWREY, EP
    PENNER, RG
    PUBLIC FINANCE, 1969, 24 (01): : 80 - 88
  • [25] Cost-benefit analysis of the RFA
    Dovich, Norman J.
    Soper, Steven A.
    SCIENCE, 2006, 314 (5806) : 1682 - 1682
  • [26] Cost-benefit analysis and the environment
    Sunstein, CR
    ETHICS, 2005, 115 (02) : 351 - 385
  • [27] THEORY OF COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
    JONES, CR
    ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 1968, 6 (04): : 333 - 333
  • [28] Rethinking cost-benefit analysis
    Adler, MD
    Posner, EA
    YALE LAW JOURNAL, 1999, 109 (02): : 165 - +
  • [29] The discipline of cost-benefit analysis
    Sen, A
    JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES, 2000, 29 (02): : 931 - 952
  • [30] Humanizing Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Sunstein, Cass R.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RISK REGULATION, 2011, 2 (01) : 3 - 7