IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v62y2013icp443-455.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of next generation biomass derived fuels for the transport sector

Author

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

Abstract

This paper evaluates next generation biomass derived fuels for the transport sector, employing the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Eight different alternatives of fuels are considered in this paper: bio-hydrogen, bio-synthetic natural gas, bio-dimethyl ether, bio-methanol, hydro thermal upgrading diesel, bio-ethanol, algal biofuel and electricity from biomass incineration. The evaluation of alternative fuels is performed according to various criteria that include economic, technical, social and policy aspects. In order to evaluate each alternative fuel, one base scenario and five 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 alternative scenarios. It is concluded that synthetic natural gas and electricity from biomass incineration are the most suitable next generation biomass derived fuels for the transport sector.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:62:y:2013:i:c:p:443-455
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513007726
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.114?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. Brennan, Liam & Owende, Philip, 2010. "Biofuels from microalgae--A review of technologies for production, processing, and extractions of biofuels and co-products," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 557-577, February.
    2. Bridgwater, A. V. & Toft, A. J. & Brammer, J. G., 2002. "A techno-economic comparison of power production by biomass fast pyrolysis with gasification and combustion," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 181-246, September.
    3. Chatzimouratidis, Athanasios I. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2007. "Objective and subjective evaluation of power plants and their non-radioactive emissions using the analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4027-4038, August.
    4. Xuan, Jin & Leung, Michael K.H. & Leung, Dennis Y.C. & Ni, Meng, 2009. "A review of biomass-derived fuel processors for fuel cell systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(6-7), pages 1301-1313, August.
    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. Searchinger, Timothy & Heimlich, Ralph & Houghton, R. A. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Tokgoz, Simla & Hayes, Dermot J. & Yu, Hun-Hsiang, 2008. "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12881, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    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. Demirbas, M. Fatih, 2011. "Biofuels from algae for sustainable development," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(10), pages 3473-3480.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Chatzimouratidis, Athanasios I. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2008. "Multicriteria evaluation of power plants impact on the living standard using the analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 1074-1089, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Li, Yuping & Wang, Tiejun & Yin, Xiuli & Wu, Chuangzhi & Ma, Longlong & Li, Haibin & Lv, Yongxing & Sun, Li, 2010. "100t/a-Scale demonstration of direct dimethyl ether synthesis from corncob-derived syngas," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 583-587.
    19. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    20. Vogt, Kristiina A. & Vogt, Daniel J. & Patel-Weynand, Toral & Upadhye, Ravi & Edlund, David & Edmonds, Robert L. & Gordon, John C. & Suntana, Asep S. & Sigurdardottir, Ragnhildur & Miller, Michael & R, 2009. "Bio-methanol: How energy choices in the western United States can help mitigate global climate change," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 233-241.
    21. 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.
    22. Grubb,Michael & Jamasb,Tooraj & Pollitt,Michael G. (ed.), 2008. "Delivering a Low Carbon Electricity System," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521888844, October.
    23. 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.
    24. Oecd, 2010. "Energy Security and Competition Policy," OECD Journal: Competition Law and Policy, OECD Publishing, vol. 11(1), pages 7-90.
    25. Faaij, Andre P.C., 2006. "Bio-energy in Europe: changing technology choices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 322-342, February.
    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. Kim, Young-Doo & Yang, Chang-Won & Kim, Beom-Jong & Moon, Ji-Hong & Jeong, Jae-Yong & Jeong, Soo-Hwa & Lee, See-Hoon & Kim, Jae-Ho & Seo, Myung-Won & Lee, Sang-Bong & Kim, Jae-Kon & Lee, Uen-Do, 2016. "Fischer–tropsch diesel production and evaluation as alternative automotive fuel in pilot-scale integrated biomass-to-liquid process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 301-312.
    2. Raphael Heck & Andreas Rudi & David Lauth & Frank Schultmann, 2024. "An Estimation of Biomass Potential and Location Optimization for Integrated Biorefineries in Germany: A Combined Approach of GIS and Mathematical Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-17, August.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Wang, Zhiwei & Lei, Tingzhou & Chang, Xia & Shi, Xinguang & Xiao, Ju & Li, Zaifeng & He, Xiaofeng & Zhu, Jinling & Yang, Shuhua, 2015. "Optimization of a biomass briquette fuel system based on grey relational analysis and analytic hierarchy process: A study using cornstalks in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 523-532.
    6. Jones, Clifton T., 2014. "The role of biomass in US industrial interfuel substitution," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 122-126.
    7. Dorota Burchart & Iga Przytuła, 2024. "Sustainability Assessment Methods for the Transport Sector Considering the Life Cycle Concept—A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-17, September.
    8. 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.
    9. Sheng, Haoqiang & Huang, Xiaobin & Hu, Wenbin & Ji, Yuan & Chen, Junming & Xie, Mingyun & He, Miaoshen & Zhang, Bo & Liu, Hong, 2023. "Stability and combustion performance enhancement of ethanol/kerosene fuel by carbonized poly[cyclotriphosphazene-co-(4,4′-sulfonyldiphenol)] nanotubes via biomimetic hydrogen bonding strategy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    10. Hossain, A. K. M. Nurul & Serletis, Apostolos, 2020. "Biofuel substitution in the U.S. transportation sector," The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, Elsevier, vol. 22(C).
    11. Opeyemi Bello, Mufutau & Adebola Solarin, Sakiru & Yee Yen, Yuen, 2018. "Interfuel Substitution, Hydroelectricity Consumption and CO2 Emissions Mitigation in Malaysia: Evidence from a Transcendental Logarithm (trans-log) Cost Function Framework," Working Papers 4, Department of Economics, University of Ilorin.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.

    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., 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Karabulut, Yağmur, 2017. "Energy project performance evaluation with sustainability perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 549-560.
    6. 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.
    7. Xu, Gang & Yang, Yong-ping & Lu, Shi-yuan & Li, Le & Song, Xiaona, 2011. "Comprehensive evaluation of coal-fired power plants based on grey relational analysis and analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2343-2351, May.
    8. 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.
    9. 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).
    10. Lee, Deok Joo & Hwang, Jooho, 2010. "Decision support for selecting exportable nuclear technology using the analytic hierarchy process: A Korean case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 161-167, January.
    11. Atmaca, Ediz & Basar, Hasan Burak, 2012. "Evaluation of power plants in Turkey using Analytic Network Process (ANP)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 555-563.
    12. Yagmur, Levent, 2016. "Multi-criteria evaluation and priority analysis for localization equipment in a thermal power plant using the AHP (analytic hierarchy process)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 476-482.
    13. Shen, Yung-Chi & Lin, Grace T.R. & Li, Kuang-Pin & Yuan, Benjamin J.C., 2010. "An assessment of exploiting renewable energy sources with concerns of policy and technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4604-4616, August.
    14. Cannemi, Marco & García-Melón, Mónica & Aragonés-Beltrán, Pablo & Gómez-Navarro, Tomás, 2014. "Modeling decision making as a support tool for policy making on renewable energy development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 127-137.
    15. Ribeiro, Lauro André & Silva, Patrícia Pereira da, 2013. "Surveying techno-economic indicators of microalgae biofuel technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 89-96.
    16. Abdul, Daud & Wenqi, Jiang & Tanveer, Arsalan, 2022. "Prioritization of renewable energy source for electricity generation through AHP-VIKOR integrated methodology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 1018-1032.
    17. 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.
    18. Milad Kolagar & Seyed Mohammad Hassan Hosseini & Ramin Felegari & Parviz Fattahi, 2020. "Policy-making for renewable energy sources in search of sustainable development: a hybrid DEA-FBWM approach," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 485-509, December.
    19. Wu, Yunna & Xu, Chuanbo & Zhang, Ting, 2018. "Evaluation of renewable power sources using a fuzzy MCDM based on cumulative prospect theory: A case in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 1227-1239.
    20. Ji, Xi & Long, Xianling, 2016. "A review of the ecological and socioeconomic effects of biofuel and energy policy recommendations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 41-52.

    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:62:y:2013:i:c:p:443-455. 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.