Comparative Analysis of Five Widely-Used Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods to Evaluate Clean Energy Technologies: A Case Study

Sustainability

Mohsen Sharifpur¹  Pasura Aungkulanon²  Akbar Maleki³  Mohammad Hossein Ahmadi³  Saeed Khojaste Effatpanah³  Lingen Chen⁴  Milad Sadeghzadeh⁵ 

[1] Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa;Faculty of Engineering, King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok, Bangkok 10800, Thailand;Faculty of Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood 3619995161, Iran;Institute of Thermal Science and Power Engineering, Wuhan Institute of Technology, Wuhan 430205, China;Renewable Energy and Environmental Engineering Department, University of Tehran, Tehran 14399571, Iran;

关键词: clean energy;    multi-criteria decision-making;    comparative analysis;    SAW;    TOPSIS;    ELECTRE;   

DOI  :  10.3390/su14031403

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Over the last decade, the total primary energy consumption has increased from 479 × 10¹⁵ BTU in 2010 to 528 × 10¹⁵ BTU in 2020. To address this ever-increasing energy demand, as well as prevent environmental pollution, clean energies are presented as a potential solution. In this regard, evaluating and selecting the most appropriate clean energy solution for a specific area is of particular importance. Therefore, in this study, a comparative analysis in Jiangsu province in China was performed by describing and implementing five prominent multi-criteria decision-making methods in the field of energy technology selection, including SAW, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, VIKOR, and COPRAS. The decision problem here consists of four clean energy options, including solar photovoltaic, wind, nuclear, and biomass, which have been evaluated by twelve basic and important criteria for ranking clean energy options. The obtained results, according to all five MCDM methods, indicate that solar photovoltaic was the optimal option in this study, followed by wind energy. The nuclear and biomass options placed third and fourth, respectively, except in the ELECTRE method ranking, in which both options scored the same and thus neither was superior. Finally, by conducting a comprehensive two-stage sensitivity analysis, in the first stage, it was found that changes in the weights of land use and water consumption criteria had the greatest impact on the performance of options, among which biomass and nuclear showed high sensitivity to variations in criteria weights. In the second stage, by defining five scenarios, the ranking of options was evaluated from different aspects so that the decision maker/organization would be able to make appropriate decisions in different situations.

【 授权许可】

Unknown