IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v48y2012icp677-686.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of alternative fuels for the Greek road transport sector using the analytic hierarchy process

Author

Listed:
  • Tsita, Katerina G.
  • Pilavachi, Petros A.

Abstract

This paper evaluates alternative fuels for the Greek road transport sector, using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Seven different alternatives of fuel mode are considered in this paper: internal combustion engine (ICE) and its combination with petroleum and 1st and 2nd generation biofuels blends, fuel cells, hybrid vehicles, plug-in hybrids and electric vehicles. The evaluation of alternative fuel modes is performed according to cost and policy aspects. In order to evaluate each alternative fuel, one base scenario and ten alternative scenarios with different weight factors selection per criterion are presented. After deciding the alternative fuels’ scoring against each criterion and the criteria weights, their synthesis gives the overall score and ranking for all ten alternative scenarios. It is concluded that ICE blended with 1st and 2nd generation biofuels are the most suitable alternative fuels for the Greek road transport sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Tsita, Katerina G. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2012. "Evaluation of alternative fuels for the Greek road transport sector using the analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 677-686.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:48:y:2012:i:c:p:677-686
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.05.079
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421512005010
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.05.079?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Santos, Georgina & Behrendt, Hannah & Teytelboym, Alexander, 2010. "Part II: Policy instruments for sustainable road transport," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 46-91.
    2. Mandell, Svante, 2009. "Policies towards a more efficient car fleet," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5184-5191, December.
    3. Dannenberg, Astrid & Mennel, Tim & Moslener, Ulf, 2008. "What does Europe pay for clean energy?--Review of macroeconomic simulation studies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1318-1330, April.
    4. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    5. Kablan, M. M., 2004. "Decision support for energy conservation promotion:: an analytic hierarchy process approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1151-1158, July.
    6. Papagiannaki, Katerina & Diakoulaki, Danae, 2009. "Decomposition analysis of CO2 emissions from passenger cars: The cases of Greece and Denmark," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3259-3267, August.
    7. Edwards, P.P. & Kuznetsov, V.L. & David, W.I.F. & Brandon, N.P., 2008. "Hydrogen and fuel cells: Towards a sustainable energy future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4356-4362, December.
    8. Köhler, Jonathan & Whitmarsh, Lorraine & Nykvist, Björn & Schilperoord, Michel & Bergman, Noam & Haxeltine, Alex, 2009. "A transitions model for sustainable mobility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2985-2995, October.
    9. Chatzimouratidis, Athanasios I. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2009. "Sensitivity analysis of technological, economic and sustainability evaluation of power plants using the analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 788-798, March.
    10. Kromer, Matthew A. & Bandivadekar, Anup & Evans, Christopher, 2010. "Long-term greenhouse gas emission and petroleum reduction goals: Evolutionary pathways for the light-duty vehicle sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 387-397.
    11. Timilsina, Govinda R. & Shrestha, Ashish, 2011. "How much hope should we have for biofuels?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 2055-2069.
    12. Berglund, Christer & Soderholm, Patrik, 2006. "Modeling technical change in energy system analysis: analyzing the introduction of learning-by-doing in bottom-up energy models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 1344-1356, August.
    13. M.R. Nava & Tugrul U. Daim, 2007. "Evaluating alternative fuels in USA: a proposed forecasting framework using AHP and scenarios," International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(4), pages 289-313.
    14. Neuwahl, Frederik & Löschel, Andreas & Mongelli, Ignazio & Delgado, Luis, 2008. "Employment impacts of EU biofuels policy: Combining bottom-up technology information and sectoral market simulations in an input-output framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 447-460, December.
    15. Boarnet, Marlon G., 2010. "Planning, climate change, and transportation: Thoughts on policy analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 587-595, October.
    16. Romm, Joseph, 2006. "The car and fuel of the future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 2609-2614, November.
    17. van Vliet, Oscar & van den Broek, Machteld & Turkenburg, Wim & Faaij, André, 2011. "Combining hybrid cars and synthetic fuels with electricity generation and carbon capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 248-268, January.
    18. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    19. Macharis, Cathy & Springael, Johan & De Brucker, Klaas & Verbeke, Alain, 2004. "PROMETHEE and AHP: The design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis.: Strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas of AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(2), pages 307-317, March.
    20. Quintero, J.A. & Montoya, M.I. & Sánchez, O.J. & Giraldo, O.H. & Cardona, C.A., 2008. "Fuel ethanol production from sugarcane and corn: Comparative analysis for a Colombian case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 385-399.
    21. Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung & Lin, Cheng-Wei & Opricovic, Serafim, 2005. "Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 1373-1383, July.
    22. Chatzimouratidis, Athanasios I. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2009. "Technological, economic and sustainability evaluation of power plants using the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 778-787, March.
    23. Oecd, 2010. "Energy Security and Competition Policy," OECD Journal: Competition Law and Policy, OECD Publishing, vol. 11(1), pages 7-90.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    2. Li, Chengjiang & Negnevitsky, Michael & Wang, Xiaolin, 2020. "Prospective assessment of methanol vehicles in China using FANP-SWOT analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 60-75.
    3. Avenali, Alessandro & Catalano, Giuseppe & Giagnorio, Mirko & Matteucci, Giorgio, 2024. "Factors influencing the adoption of zero-emission buses: A review-based framework," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    4. Mustafa Hamurcu & Tamer Eren, 2023. "Multicriteria decision making and goal programming for determination of electric automobile aimed at sustainable green environment: a case study," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 211-231, June.
    5. Li, Chengjiang & Negnevitsky, Michael & Wang, Xiaolin & Yue, Wen Long & Zou, Xin, 2019. "Multi-criteria analysis of policies for implementing clean energy vehicles in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 826-840.
    6. Narayanamoorthy, Samayan & Ramya, L. & Kalaiselvan, Samayan & Kureethara, Joseph Varghese & Kang, Daekook, 2021. "Use of DEMATEL and COPRAS method to select best alternative fuel for control of impact of greenhouse gas emissions," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    7. Ullah, Kafait & Hamid, Salman & Mirza, Faisal Mehmood & Shakoor, Usman, 2018. "Prioritizing the gaseous alternatives for the road transport sector of Pakistan: A multi criteria decision making analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PB), pages 1072-1084.
    8. Tsita, Katerina G. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2013. "Evaluation of next generation biomass derived fuels for the transport sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 443-455.
    9. Madhusudhan Adhikari & Laxman Prasad Ghimire & Yeonbae Kim & Prakash Aryal & Sundar Bahadur Khadka, 2020. "Identification and Analysis of Barriers against Electric Vehicle Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-20, June.
    10. Alev Taskin Gumus & A. Yesim Yayla & Erkan Çelik & Aytac Yildiz, 2013. "A Combined Fuzzy-AHP and Fuzzy-GRA Methodology for Hydrogen Energy Storage Method Selection in Turkey," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-16, June.
    11. Sivaraja, C.M. & Sakthivel, G., 2017. "Compression ignition engine performance modelling using hybrid MCDM techniques for the selection of optimum fish oil biodiesel blend at different injection timings," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 118-141.
    12. Ecer, Fatih, 2021. "A consolidated MCDM framework for performance assessment of battery electric vehicles based on ranking strategies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    13. Meenu Singh & Millie Pant, 2021. "A review of selected weighing methods in MCDM with a case study," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 12(1), pages 126-144, February.
    14. Sehatpour, Mohammad-Hadi & Kazemi, Aliyeh & Sehatpour, Hesam-eddin, 2017. "Evaluation of alternative fuels for light-duty vehicles in Iran using a multi-criteria approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 295-310.
    15. Martin Kügemann & Heracles Polatidis, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis of Road Transportation Fuels and Vehicles: A Systematic Review and Classification of the Literature," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
    16. Ibrahim M. Hezam & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Pratibha Rani & Fausto Cavallaro & Abhijit Saha & Jabir Ali & Wadim Strielkowski & Dalia Štreimikienė, 2022. "A Hybrid Intuitionistic Fuzzy-MEREC-RS-DNMA Method for Assessing the Alternative Fuel Vehicles with Sustainability Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-32, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tsita, Katerina G. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2013. "Evaluation of next generation biomass derived fuels for the transport sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 443-455.
    2. Jamal, Taskin & Urmee, Tania & Shafiullah, G.M., 2020. "Planning of off-grid power supply systems in remote areas using multi-criteria decision analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    3. Shen, Yung-Chi & Chou, Chiyang James & Lin, Grace T.R., 2011. "The portfolio of renewable energy sources for achieving the three E policy goals," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 2589-2598.
    4. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2016. "An integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach for renewable energy resources selection in Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 435-448.
    5. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Karabulut, Yağmur, 2017. "Energy project performance evaluation with sustainability perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 549-560.
    6. Phillips, Jason, 2013. "Determining the sustainability of large-scale photovoltaic solar power plants," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 435-444.
    7. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    8. Parajuli, Ranjan & Dalgaard, Tommy & Jørgensen, Uffe & Adamsen, Anders Peter S. & Knudsen, Marie Trydeman & Birkved, Morten & Gylling, Morten & Schjørring, Jan Kofod, 2015. "Biorefining in the prevailing energy and materials crisis: a review of sustainable pathways for biorefinery value chains and sustainability assessment methodologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 244-263.
    9. Zhang, Weishi & Wang, Can & Zhang, Long & Xu, Ying & Cui, Yuanzheng & Lu, Zifeng & Streets, David G., 2018. "Evaluation of the performance of distributed and centralized biomass technologies in rural China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 445-455.
    10. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
    11. Ahmad, Salman & Tahar, Razman Mat, 2014. "Selection of renewable energy sources for sustainable development of electricity generation system using analytic hierarchy process: A case of Malaysia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 458-466.
    12. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Participatory selection of sustainability criteria and indicators for bioenergy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 92-102.
    13. Stein, Eric W., 2013. "A comprehensive multi-criteria model to rank electric energy production technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 640-654.
    14. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    15. Domenech, B. & Ferrer-Martí, L. & Pastor, R., 2015. "Including management and security of supply constraints for designing stand-alone electrification systems in developing countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 359-369.
    16. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid & Nemery, Philippe, 2016. "Which energy mix for the UK (United Kingdom)? An evolutive descriptive mapping with the integrated GAIA (graphical analysis for interactive aid)–AHP (analytic hierarchy process) visualization tool," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 602-611.
    17. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    18. Alkan, Ömer & Albayrak, Özlem Karadağ, 2020. "Ranking of renewable energy sources for regions in Turkey by fuzzy entropy based fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy MULTIMOORA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 712-726.
    19. AlSabbagh, Maha & Siu, Yim Ling & Guehnemann, Astrid & Barrett, John, 2017. "Integrated approach to the assessment of CO2e-mitigation measures for the road passenger transport sector in Bahrain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 203-215.
    20. Milutinović, Biljana & Stefanović, Gordana & Dassisti, Michele & Marković, Danijel & Vučković, Goran, 2014. "Multi-criteria analysis as a tool for sustainability assessment of a waste management model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 190-201.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:48:y:2012:i:c:p:677-686. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.