Prioritization of bioethanol production pathways in China based on life cycle sustainability assessment and multicriteria decision-making

Abstract

Purpose The study objectives are twofold: (i) combining the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) framework and the multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) methodology for sustainability assessment and (ii) determining the most sustainable scenario for bioethanol production in China according to the preferences of the decision-makers/stakeholders. Methods Life cycle assessment (LCA), life cycle costing (LCC), and social life cycle assessment (SLCA) are combined to collect the corresponding criteria data on environmental, economic, and social aspects, respectively. The study develops a novel SLCA method for quantifying the social criteria. The decision-makers/stakeholders can use linguistic terms to assess these criteria, and fuzzy theory is used to transform the linguistic variables into real numbers. Once the sustainability assessment criteria are determined, the study develops an MCDM method that combines the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and the VIKOR method to prioritize the alternatives. The AHP is used to determine the criteria weights that are a prerequisite when using VIKOR; the VIKOR method is then used to determine the sustainability sequence of the scenarios. Results and discussion The study's proposed method investigates an illustrative case about three alternative bioethanol production scenarios (wheat-based, corn-based, and cassavabased): The prior sequence (based on the sustainability performances) in descending order is cassava-based, cornbased, and wheat-based. The proposed methodology results allow Chinese decision-makers/stakeholders to select the most sustainable scenario among many alternatives. The proposed methodology is generic, meaning that further alternatives can be studied and the most sustainable option can be ultimately determined.Conclusions The main study contribution is to test the combination of an MCDM methodology and LCSA for sustainability decision-making by studying three alternative pathways for bioethanol production in China. The proposed method feasibly enables the decision-makers/stakeholders to find the most sustainable scenario to achieve their objectives among various alternatives.

VIKOR Technique: A Systematic Review of the State of the Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications

“…Results of this study indicated that noise pollution and air quality were the important criteria of environmental quality in Taipei. Vučijak, Kupusović, Midžić-Kurtagić andĆerić [3] evaluated sustainable hydropower by applying the VIKOR, Quijano H, Botero B and Domínguez B [4] used VIKOR for development of renewable sustainable energy plans, Martin-Utrillas, Juan-Garcia, Canto-Perello and Curiel-Esparza [6] integrated the VIKOR, fuzzy Delphi and AHP for selection of best infrastructure related to sustainable economy, Ren, Manzardo, Mazzi, Zuliani and Scipioni [8] combined the VIKOR and AHP for assessment of life cycle sustainability, Yazdani-Chamzini, Fouladgar, Zavadskas and Moini [7] used the VIKOR, SAW, ARAS, TOPSIS and MOORA for selection of the best renewable energy sources, Civic and Vucijak [9] utilized VIKOR for insulation options for warmth of buildings to increase energy efficiency, Kim and Chung [10] evaluated the vulnerability of the water supply to variability and climate change. In total, 13 past papers used the VIKOR technique in the fields of sustainability and renewable energy, which presented in Table 10.…”

Review of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment and Potential for Its Adoption at an Automotive Company

“…Several authors chose to integrate multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in order to be able to combine different indicators into one aggregated result, deriving weights for the respective indicators, and even translate qualitative information into quantitative metrics [48][49][50][51][52]. In order to determine weights, researchers usually applied fuzzy evaluation methods, the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) or a combination of those to translate qualitative evaluations of experts into metrics [48][49][50][51]53].…”

The challenging paradigm of interrelated energy systems towards a more sustainable future

“…LC approaches assessing social-economic impacts such as SLCA, LCC, and LCSA are relatively novel methods, and call for further methodological development and practices of case studies. However, bioenergy is among one of the most assessed topics in existing studies [454][455][456]. Although the depth and breadth of LC approaches have developed rapidly in the past decades, further research is needed to consolidate important controversies and close methodological gaps.…”