美國國家海洋與大氣管理局旗下的國家氣候資料中心統計顯示，2013年是全球氣溫史上最炎熱的第四名，而跨政府氣候變遷小組已提出警告，若人類的各種經濟活動完全依照目前的水準持續下去，在本世紀內可能導致全球平均氣溫上升2~4攝氏度，而此舉可能對人類的生存活動、經濟發展、水源、健康以及糧食短缺形成史無前例的威脅。而毫無疑問的，人類的各種經濟活動是溫室氣體排放的主要來源，本文以人類各種經濟活動中不可或缺的食物作為出發點進行探討。
台灣素來有水果王國的稱號，但以最常見的水果-蘋果為例，平均一年依然需要進口約13萬噸的蘋果以滿足國內的需求，那台灣國民在消費本土蘋果以及進口蘋果時對環境會有什麼樣不同的影響呢？本文以ISO 14040的國際標準來將蘋果的生命週期做出區分，專注於進口蘋果較本土蘋果多出來的跨國運輸環節的碳排放進行計算，並採用PAS 2050的做法，將所有的排放指標換算為二氧化碳當量進行比較。
由本研究計算可得：台灣消費者每購買一公斤來自智利的蘋果，在跨國海運的部分即排放了溫室氣體450公克二氧化碳當量；2014年全年度由於海運進口蘋果產生的額外碳排放為43,034公噸二氧化碳當量。若想藉由資助風力發電來進行碳抵銷，需要花費13,210,654新台幣才能達成碳中和。若想藉由植樹減碳活動來抵銷2014年度該部分的溫室氣體排放，則需造人工針葉林2,962公頃；或是人工闊葉林2,379公頃。而2,379公頃的人工闊葉林則相當於0.5%台灣人民生活空間的減少。在這個寸土寸金的台灣，如果沒辦法騰出空間種樹減碳，也沒有新科技減緩溫室效應的情況下，選擇當地、當季的台灣食材，對於地球保護也是不無小補。

Based on the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center, 2013 was the fourth warmest year in history. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has also warned that if human economic activities are not changing soon, global average temperature will increase 2 to 4 degrees by the end of the century. A temperature increase will result in climate change and water shortage which leads to food shortages as well. Moreover, there is no doubt that human economy activities are the main source of greenhouse gas emissions but food is indispensable. This research paper will therefore focus on food carbon foot print with apple as an example.
Taiwan has a variety of different fruits but apples are still mainly imported from overseas to satisfy local demand. The impact of imported versus local produced apples towards the environment will be therefore analyzed based on ISO 14040 and PAS 2050.
One kilogram apples from Chile for e.g are causing 450 grams of CO2e. In 2014, 130,000 tones were imported and has produced 43,034 metric tons of CO2e. which cost approximately NTD $ 13,210,654 to carbon offset through wind power.
Reducing emissions by planting trees to offset greenhouse gas emissions, 2,962 hectares of artificial conifer plantation or 2,379 hectares of broadleaf forest are needed. However, 2,379 hectares of artificial broad leaved forest is equivalent to a reduction of 0.5% of living space. Thus, reducing emissions through tree plant activities is not a solution for Taiwan. Additionally no technology is so far available to reduce carbon emissions effectively. Instead, considering to consume local produced food should be one of the solution.

第一章 緒論......................................................1
第一節 研究背景 .................................................1
第二節 研究動機 .................................................3
第三節 研究目的 .................................................4
第四節 研究方法 .................................................5
第二章 文獻回顧 .................................................6
第一節 農產品的跨國運輸研究 .....................................6
第二節 碳足跡計算方式研究 ........................................8
第三節 碳抵銷的做法 ..............................................9
第四節 農產品生命週期介紹.......................................10
第三章 理論模型 ................................................12
第一節 ISO 14040：2006 生命週期評估—原則與架構 ................12
第二節 PAS 2050：2008產品與服務溫室氣體排放生命週期評估規範 ...15
第四章 實證分析.................................................17
第一節 本研究所採用的進口產品類別...............................17
第二節 長途海運所造成的溫室氣體排放 ............................18
第三節 抵銷溫室氣體排放 ........................................21
一、 林地的碳貯存變化量計算 ..............................23二、 植樹減碳之效益分析 .................................28
第四節 實證結果與分析...........................................29
第五章 結論.....................................................31

參考文獻

1. 盧怡靜，呂穎彬， 2014。「ISO 14040生命週期評估的下一步」，『永續產業發展季刊』。66期，29-35。
2. Dalmeny, K., C. Haigh, B. Tajima-Simpson, and E. Sparks, 2011. The Food Miles Report: The Dangers of Long-Distance Food Transport. London： Sustain: The alliance for better food and farming.
3. Hassard, H. A., M. H. Couch, T. Techa-erawan and B.C. McLellan, 2014. “Product Carbon Footprint and Energy Analysis of Alternative Coffee Products in Japan,” Journal of Cleaner Production. 73：310-321.
4. Hertwich, E. G. and G. P. Peters, 2009. “Carbon Footprint of Nations: A Global, Trade-Linked Analysis, ” Journal of Environmental Science & Technology. 43 : 6414-6420.
5. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2012. Summary for Policymakers. In: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. Cambridge, UK, and New York, USA：Cambridge University Press.
6. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2013. Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Cambridge, UK, and New York, USA：Cambridge University Press.
7. International Maritime Organization, 2014. Third IMO GHG Study 2014. London, UK：International Maritime Organization
8. Iriarte A., M. G. Almeida, and P. Villalobos, 2013. “Carbon footprint of premium quality export bananas: Case study in Ecuador, the world's largest exporter,” Science of The Total Environment. 472：1082-1088.
9. Kemp, K., A. Insch, D. K. Holdsworth, and J. G. Knight, 2010. “Food Miles: Do UK Consumers Actually Care?” Food Policy. 35：504-513.
10. Kenny, T., and N. F. Gray, 2009. “Comparative Performance of Six Carbon Footprint Models for Use in Ireland,” Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 29：1-6.
11. Lovell, H. C., 2010. “Governing the carbon offset market,” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. 1：353-362.
12. Muradov, N. Z., and T. N. Veziroğlu, 2008. ““Green” path from fossil-based to hydrogen economy: An overview of carbon-neutral technologies,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 33：6804–6839.
13. NOAA National Climatic Data Center, 2014. State of the Climate: Global Analysis for Annual 2013, published online January 2014, retrieved on June 3, 2015. Available from http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201313.
14. Paxton, A., 1994. The Food Miles Report: The Dangers of Long-Distance Food Transport. Charlotte, NC：The Sustainable Agriculture, Food and Environment (S.A.F.E.) Alliance.
15. Robertson, K., M. Garnham, and W. Symes, 2014. “Life Cycle Carbon Footprint of the Packaging and Transport of New Zealand Kiwifruit.” The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 19：1693-1704.
16. Roibás, L., A. Elbehri, and A. Hospido, 2014, “Carbon footprint along the Ecuadorian banana supply chain: Methodological improvements and calculation tool,” paper presented at Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-Food Sector. San Francisco, USA. ACLCA, Vashon, WA, USA., 8-10 October 2014.
17. United Nations Environment Programme, 2013. The Emissions Gap Report 2013. Nairobi：United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
18. World Bank. 2014. State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2014. Washington, DC：World Bank.

參考網站

1. Carbon Care Asia http://www.carboncareasia.com/chi/our_services/offsets/projects.php

2. International Organization for Standardization
http://www.iso.org/iso/home.htm

3. ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management -- Life cycle assessment -- Principles and framework. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:14040:ed-2:v1:en

4. Life cycle assessment
http://www.solidworks.com/

5. PAS 2050:2011 Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services. http://shop.bsigroup.com/en/forms/PASs/PAS-2050/

6. The inconvenient truth of carbon offsets
http://www.nature.com/news/the-inconvenient-truth-of-carbon-offsets-1.10373

7. SeaRates.com
http://www.searates.com/

8. 2014年中華民國國家溫室氣體清冊報告
www.unfccc.saveoursky.org.tw/2014nir/

9. 愛台12建設總體計畫
www.ndc.gov.tw/dn.aspx?uid=7634

10. 財政部關務署統計資料庫查詢系統
https://portal.sw.nat.gov.tw/APGA/GA03

11. 行政院農委會林務局
http://ngis.forest.gov.tw/Wikipedia/Pedia.aspx?id=T212

12. 行政院環境保護署http://cfp.epa.gov.tw/carbon/ezCFM/Function/PlatformInfo/FLConcept/FLFootLifecycle.aspx
13. 陽明海運股份有限公司https://www.yangming.com/traditional_chinese/ASP/service/service_network/container_equipment.asp

14. 中華民國行政院 http://www.ey.gov.tw/News_Content4.aspx?n=3D06E532B0D8316C&sms=4ACFA38B877F185F&s=F91C6A080CA00A5E

15. 國際造船股份有限公司http://www.csbcnet.com.tw/csbc/monthly_pub/data/462/01公司報導/01陽明海運維明輪命名典禮.pdf