本研究採用作業基礎模型(activity-based model)，計算四種散裝船型-海岬型、巴拿馬極限型、輕便極限型和輕便型之航次別油耗和排放強度(延噸公里排放量)，再引入三種不同的減速情境(減速10%、20%和30%)，探討其減速前後之減排效果，並引入CATCH模型評估其成本效益。研究結果顯示：(1)減速幅度越高，減排效益越顯著，大型船由於排放基數高，各情境下之減排量皆較小型船高，以海岬型船為例，其減速30%可節省每航次約2,781噸的二氧化碳排放。(2)研究結果中所有CATCH值皆為正，代表三種減速情境皆會造成業者額外之營運成本，減速的幅度越大，其單位減排成本越高；比較CATCH值的大小，可發現減速應用在大型船雖具環境效益，但在經濟效益之表現卻不理想，海岬型船每單位減排成本為所有船型中最高，而輕便型船之單位減排成本為最低，顯示輕便型船在減速應用上最具成本效益。減少每噸二氧化碳需付出的成本依船型和減速幅度不同，約為62美元/噸至344美元/噸不等。
本研究之實證以散裝船C3航線為例，探討在維持固定運量(靠港頻率)的限制下，投入船舶數和營運航速間之權衡關係，並以最低營運成本為目標式，找出最佳之營運決策組合，其結果顯示最低成本決策為佈署九艘船，並以14.53節的平均航速營運，此最佳航速恰與實務上海岬型船航速相符。

This paper used Activity-based method to calculate the line-specific fuel consumption and corresponding CO2 emission of four types of dry-bulk carrier including Capesize, Panamax, Supramax and Handysize. This study introduced three scenarios of speed reduction (10%, 20% and 30%) to estimate emission mitigate and energy saving. The CATCH model was applied to evaluate the cost-efficiency of speed reduction. The findings are as follows: (1) The more speed reduced, the more emission saved and larger ships lead to more emission reduction than smaller ships. For example, on the Capesize ship, 30% of speed reduction can achieve 2,781 ton of CO2 emission. (2) Reducing speed causes additional cost as a result that all CATCH value are positive. In addition, larger ship doesn’t perform well in cost efficiency regardless of its virtue of environment-efficiency. For example, on the Handysize ship, the lowest CATCH value indicates that it has the best cost-efficiency performance in terms of speed reduction among these four ships. The CATCH in this study differs in accordance with ship-type and speed reduction which is about 62 $/ton~344$/ton.
The line C3 of Capesize was established to study the best strategy combination of ship number and operational speed. Under one port call per week, the minimum solution turns out to be 9 ships in the service with average operational speed of 14.53 knots, which is in line with empirically operational speed of Capesize ship.

中文文獻
1. 中華海運研究協會:
http://www.cmri.org.tw/kmportal-deluxe/front/bin/home.phtml，2010年8月25日。
2. 中華船務網：http://www.chnshipping.com/index.asp，2010年8月30日。
3. 張朝陽(民97)，IMO確認將擔負氣候變遷的挑戰責任，船舶與海運通訊，第五十六期，頁2-4。
4. 張朝陽(民99)，論綠色海運之實踐-防止船舶空氣汙染(V) ，船舶與海運通訊，第七十五期，頁19-25。
5. 陳永順(民99)，國際散裝乾貨船市場行情分析，船舶與海運通訊，第八十四期，頁5-15。
6. 林光、張志清(2010)，航業經營與管理，航貿文化有限公司。
英文文獻
7. Corbett, J., Wang, H., & Winebrake, J.(2009).The effectiveness and cost of speed reductions on emissions from international shipping. Transportation Research Part D, 14, 593-598.
8. Cariou, P. (2011). Is slow steaming a sustainable means of reducing CO2 emissions from container shipping? Transportation Research Part D, 16, 260-264.
9. Endresen, Ø., & Sørgard, E. (1999). Reference values for ship pollution. Det Norske Veritas, Oslo, Rep. 99-2034.
10. Endresen, Ø., & Sørgard, E. (2003). Emission from international sea transportation and environmental impact. Journal of Geophysical Research, 108(D17), 4560.
11. Endresen, Ø., Sørgard, E., Behrens ,H.L.,& Brett, P.O. (2007). A historical reconstruction of ships’ fuel consumption and emissions, Journal of Geophysical Research, 112(D12301).
12. Eide, M., Endresen, O., Skjong, R., Longva T., & Alvik, S.(2009). Cost-effectiveness assessment of CO2 reducing measures in shipping. Maritime Policy & Management, 36(4), 367-384.
13. Faber, J., Freund, M., Köpke M. & Nelissen D. (2010). Going Slow to Reduce Emissions. Seas At Risk.
14. International Maritime Organization(2000). Study of greenhouse gas emissions from ships.
15. International Maritime Organization (2009). Second IMO GHG study 2009
16. International Energy Agency(2010). CO2 Emissions From Fuel Combustion Highlights.
17. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(2007). IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007.
18. Lin, B., & Lin, C. Y. (2006). Compliance with international emission regulations:Reducing the air pollution from merchant vessels. Marine Policy, 30, 220-225.
19. Notteboom, T.E., & Vernimmen, B.(2009). The effect of high fuel costs on liner service configuration in container shipping. Journal of Transport Geography, 17, 325-337.
20. Psaraftis, H., & Kontovas, C.(2009). CO2 emission Statistics for the world commercial fleet. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 8 (1), 1-25.
21. Psaraftis, H., & Kontovas, C.(2010). Balancing the economic and environmental performance of maritime transportation. Transportation Research Part D, 15, 458-462.
22. Psaraftis, H.N., Kontovas, C.A., & Kakalis, N.(2009). Speed reduction as an emissions reduction measure for fast ships. In: 10th Int. Conference on Fast Transportation (FAST 2009), Athens, Greece, 5-8.
23. Reynolds, J. E. and Caney, R. W. (2008). Reeds Marine Distance Tables, 10th Ed.. Miranda Delmar-Morgan, London.
24. Tzannatos, E.(2010). Cost assessment of ship emission reduction methods at berth: the case of the Port of Piraeus, Greece. Maritime Policy & Management , 37(4), 427-445.
25. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2007). Review of Maritime transport 2007. United Nations.
26. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2008). Review of Maritime transport 2008. United Nations.
27. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2009). Review of Maritime transport 2009. United Nations.