مقایسه تجزیه و تحلیل هزینه چرخه عمر برای خوابگاه کالج نمونه با استفاده از یارانه های دولتی در مقابل قیمت گذاری هزینه کل آب
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|23356||2006||13 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Ecological Economics, Volume 58, Issue 1, 10 June 2006, Pages 66–78
This study examines the impact of public policy on life cycle cost analyses for a hypothetical high-density residential dormitory. The specific public policy decisions considered in this study are (1) operating subsidies for municipal water production and treatment, (2) capital subsidies in the form of infrastructure grants to municipal water districts from state and federal governments, (3) deferred recapitalization and maintenance, and (4) technology improvements required by more stringent water quality standards. These four public policy influences create market imperfections, which “artificially” alter the price of water from its natural equilibrium. In this study, market imperfections are factored into the current consumer price of water to determine the full-cost price in four distinct municipalities. Results suggest that market imperfections created by public policy tend to undervalue life cycle cost analyses for efficient solutions. Implications of the results for researchers, public-policy makers, and management educators are discussed.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency of the United States of America (U.S. E.P.A.) recognized the year 2002 as the “Year of Clean Water.” Internationally, 2003 has been designated as the “International Year of Water.” Within the commercial building industry, the United States Green Building Council has included water efficiency credits within the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) Rating System. The topics of full-cost water pricing, municipal infrastructure needs, and the use of water efficient plumbing fixtures and appliances are current topics of interest within the research and industry communities. Additionally, the proper management of the nation's water resources is important to protect the health of the population and the natural environment. Considering each of these factors, the management of our nation's water resources requires a transdisciplinary dialog. From the perspective of a municipality, proper management of the nation's water resources includes establishing water pricing methods that collect sufficient funds to repair, replace and maintain municipal infrastructure as well as to supply sufficient funds to support new water and wastewater treatment technologies. From the U.S. EPA's perspective, proper management of water resources includes the development of standards and regulations to protect human and environmental health. Additionally, from the perspective of the general population, proper water management requires that a sufficient supply of affordable water is continually available to meet users' needs. With an increasingly urbanized population, population growth in water-scarce regions of the United States, and aging infrastructure, further study is necessary to determine if water can be used more efficiency and economically. The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, to review the current focus points of several stakeholders related to the management of water resources in the United States, including the US government, industry, and the research community. Then, quantitatively considering these focus points, the water consumption of three plumbing design scenarios for a college dormitory will be analyzed using life cycle cost analysis, contrasting current subsidized pricing versus full-cost water pricing methods. The goal of the analysis is to provide insight as to whether the use of full-cost pricing would encourage more efficient plumbing designs for high-density residential buildings.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Alternative One, the efficient fixtures system, will likely generate the greatest cost savings over a 25-year period for both current pricing and full-cost pricing models. However, the general research hypothesis is partially supported by the results of our study because the rank order of present values for the three design options changes in three of the four municipalities considered. Also, for Houghton, Michigan, the most efficient alternative generates the best present value if full-cost pricing is utilized. Under current pricing methods, the life cycle cost analysis suggests that the efficient fixture system, Alternative One, is the most economical for all four municipalities considered within this study. The graywater plus efficient fixture system, Alternative Two, ranks second under current pricing for Houghton, while the Base System ranks second for Ames, Boulder and Newark. The graywater plus efficient fixture system ranks third for Ames, Boulder and Newark under current pricing. For Houghton, the base system ranks third. Under the full-cost pricing scenario presented, the efficient fixture system (Alternative 1) ranks first for three of the municipalities, Ames, Boulder, and Newark. For Houghton, the graywater plus efficient fixture alternative ranks first. The graywater plus efficient fixture option ranks second for Ames and Newark. This represents a reversal of ordering for Alternative Two (the most efficient design) in three of the four municipalities studied (second to first in Houghton, third to second in Ames and Newark). It is also interesting to note that the efficient fixture plus graywater system ranks third for Boulder, while the base system ranks third for Houghton, Ames and Newark under full-cost pricing.