Multi criteria decision making (MCDM) application for the feasibility study of a potential CSP project in Namibia

Saenz, Juan Manuel; Vantsiotis, Georgios; Collins, Rob; Mutschler, Margaret; Bailey, Fred A.; Gadney, Gordon; Muller, Grant

doi:10.1063/1.5067129

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The integration of fuzzy set theory to TOPSIS helps represent the criteria weight and alternative ratings by triangular membership functions and is set to capture the uncertainty of the subjective assessments. A similar study [43] on CSP project potential in Namibia was undertaken by combining the MCDM technique AHP and levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) analysis from a techno-economic perspective. The authors used the traditional hierarchy approach with seven criteria, including technical, infrastructure, environmental, socio-economic, funding, deliverability, and terrain characteristics, along with 29 sub-criteria to score for performance.…”

Section: Mcda For Solar Energy Technology Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 1 presents the key performance indicators discussed so far in the literature. [41] Preliminary assessment of concentrated solar power technologies PROMETHEE I and II Solar capacity factor, Levelised cost of electricity, Environmental risk [42] Compare different heat transfer fluids for concentrated solar power systems fuzzy TOPSIS Land use, Investment and operation and maintenance costs, Thermal storage costs, Technology maturity [43] Assess the feasibility of concentrated solar power project in Namibia AHP Water use, Availability, Landscape impact, Local community impact, Ecological impact [44] Find the best photovoltaic cell TOPSIS Efficiency, Pay-back time, Greenhouse emissions [45] Sustainability of PV projects in different locations AHP Net present value, Energy pay-back time, Discounted pay-back time [46] Rank the PV technologies ELECTRE III Solar fraction, Aesthetic, Module flexibility [32] Rank the electric energy production technologies AHP Capacity factor, Fuel cost, Loss of life expectancy, Public acceptance [34] Selection of renewable electric generation alternative AHP-VIKOR Avoided Tons of CO2, Useful life [35] Evaluation of renewable energy alternatives AHP-MACBETH Reliability, Need of waste disposal, Political acceptance, Compatibility with national energy policy [47] Selection of portfolio of solar energy project experiments for funding MAUT System size, Solar cell type [36] Selection of renewable energy source for a country ANP-TOPSIS Accident fatalities, Soil acidification [37] Site selection for wind/solar hybrid power station ELECTRE II Public attitude, Transmission line length, Electricity demand [38] Solar farm site selection AHP Slope, Location of system [39] Identification of regions for solar power plant construction…”

Section: Mcda For Solar Energy Technology Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A General Framework for Multi-Criteria Based Feasibility Studies for Solar Energy Projects: Application to a Real-World Solar Farm

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growth of solar energy is projected to slow down during 2023–25 despite the fall in costs due to economic deceleration, reduced incentives, and market barriers including the lack of relevant and flexible energy project planning and decision-making tools. This study proposes a flexible and computationally simple multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA)-based model that takes technical, financial, environmental, social and legal aspects of all project options as input and outputs a feasibility score for each option, which enables ranking the options and identifying the best alternative. The proposed model is applied to a real-world photovoltaic solar farm planned at a site in England and comprising nine different configurations formed by varying system capacity, energy storage option, mode of stakeholder, and network connections. The results of our study show that in this case the options without battery storage and a greater number of off-taker connections are more favorable than the options with battery storage. The analysis also shows that for the solar farm of the presented case study, ‘self-consumption fraction’ and ‘energy yield’, ‘net present value’, ‘life-cycle carbon emission reduction’, ‘ease of permit acquisition’ and ‘public approval’ are key sub-criteria for ‘technical’, ‘financial’, ‘environmental’, and ‘social and legal’ criteria, respectively. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the confidence on the obtained solution, and a change in the first preference was noticed when ‘environmental’ and ‘social and legal’ aspects are given higher weight over ‘technical’ and ‘financial’ aspects. The results obtained are in line with the recommendations by experts, who carried out an independent feasibility analysis considering the same options.

show abstract

Section: Mcda For Solar Energy Technology Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%