IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v290y2024ics0360544223035685.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

NSGA-T: A novel evaluation method for renewable energy plans

Author

Listed:
  • Leng, Ya-Jun
  • Li, Xiao-Shuang
  • Zhang, Huan

Abstract

In the background of exhaustion of the traditional fossil energy sources and environmental deterioration, developing renewable energy has become a strategic choice for countries to achieve energy sustainable utilization and carbon neutrality target. Different renewable energy technical plans have different characteristics under multiple criteria. Therefore, before the further exploitation of renewable energy sources, it is of great significance to evaluate the comprehensive performance of different plans and then determine the best renewable energy sources. However, the commonly used weight calculation methods in the existing renewable energy evaluation have obvious shortcomings, such as the randomness of the subjective method is strong and the gap in the weight allocation of the objective method is too large, which affect the reliability and accuracy of the sorting result. In this paper, a novel weight calculation method based on non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) is proposed, and is applied to renewable energy evaluation. The study in this paper focuses on methodology. Firstly, for the linear normalized and Zeros normalized evaluation data, the differences between renewable energy plans in the two normalized evaluation data are measured, and the ranking deviations of the two normalized data are calculated. Then, the multi-objective weight solving model is constructed in terms of plans differences minimization and ranking vectors deviations minimization. The NSGA-II algorithm is applied to the optimization of multi-objective functions to find the Pareto non-dominated solution, so as to determine the weight values of each evaluation index. Finally, the TOPSIS method is used to determine the relative closeness value of each plan, and the rankings of renewable energy technical plans are achieved. Based on the actual renewable energy development data of a province in China, experiments were carried out to investigate the effectiveness of the proposed method. Experimental results show that the proposed method performs better than some popular renewable energy evaluation methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Leng, Ya-Jun & Li, Xiao-Shuang & Zhang, Huan, 2024. "NSGA-T: A novel evaluation method for renewable energy plans," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:290:y:2024:i:c:s0360544223035685
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.130174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544223035685
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2023.130174?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. He, Yongxiu & Pang, Yuexia & Zhang, Qi & Jiao, Zhe & Chen, Qian, 2018. "Comprehensive evaluation of regional clean energy development levels based on principal component analysis and rough set theory," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 643-653.
    2. Liu, Lintong & Zhai, Rongrong & Hu, Yangdi, 2023. "Performance evaluation of wind-solar-hydrogen system for renewable energy generation and green hydrogen generation and storage: Energy, exergy, economic, and enviroeconomic," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    3. Li, Menghan & Zhang, Kaiyue & Alamri, Ahmad Mohammed & Ageli, Mohammed Moosa & Khan, Numan, 2023. "Resource curse hypothesis and sustainable development: Evaluating the role of renewable energy and R&D," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    4. Kaya, Tolga & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2010. "Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 2517-2527.
    5. Wang, Delu & Wan, Kaidi & Song, Xuefeng, 2018. "Coal miners’ livelihood vulnerability to economic shock: Multi-criteria assessment and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 301-314.
    6. 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.
    7. Ding, Yuanping & Dang, Yaoguo, 2023. "Forecasting renewable energy generation with a novel flexible nonlinear multivariable discrete grey prediction model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    8. Zeng, Yuan & Guo, Waiying & Wang, Hongmei & Zhang, Fengbin, 2020. "A two-stage evaluation and optimization method for renewable energy development based on data envelopment analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    9. Leng, Ya-Jun & Peng, Dan & Zhang, Huan, 2023. "Integrated energy system evaluation method based on dimensionality reduction and indexes updating with incomplete information," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Cheng, Dawei & Lu, Zhong & Zhou, Jia & Liang, Xihui, 2023. "An optimizing maintenance policy for airborne redundant systems operating with faults by using Markov process and NSGA-II," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    12. Häckel, Björn & Pfosser, Stefan & Tränkler, Timm, 2017. "Explaining the energy efficiency gap - Expected Utility Theory versus Cumulative Prospect Theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 414-426.
    13. Şengül, Ümran & Eren, Miraç & Eslamian Shiraz, Seyedhadi & Gezder, Volkan & Şengül, Ahmet Bilal, 2015. "Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 617-625.
    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. Abdelkareem, Mohammad Ali & Abbas, Qaisar & Sayed, Enas Taha & Shehata, N. & Parambath, J.B.M. & Alami, Abdul Hai & Olabi, A.G., 2024. "Recent advances on metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) and their applications in energy conversion devices: Comprehensive review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 299(C).

    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. Deveci, Muhammet & Cali, Umit & Kucuksari, Sadik & Erdogan, Nuh, 2020. "Interval type-2 fuzzy sets based multi-criteria decision-making model for offshore wind farm development in Ireland," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Ezbakhe, Fatine & Pérez-Foguet, Agustí, 2021. "Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 601-613.
    4. Aikaterini Papapostolou & Charikleia Karakosta & Kalliopi-Anastasia Kourti & Haris Doukas & John Psarras, 2019. "Supporting Europe’s Energy Policy Towards a Decarbonised Energy System: A Comparative Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-26, July.
    5. Pei-Hsuan Tsai & Chih-Jou Chen & Ho-Chin Yang, 2021. "Using Porter’s Diamond Model to Assess the Competitiveness of Taiwan’s Solar Photovoltaic Industry," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    6. 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.
    7. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Dragan Pamučar & Ibrahim Badi & Korica Sanja & Radojko Obradović, 2018. "A Novel Approach for the Selection of Power-Generation Technology Using a Linguistic Neutrosophic CODAS Method: A Case Study in Libya," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-25, September.
    9. 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.
    10. Saraswat, S.K. & Digalwar, Abhijeet K., 2021. "Empirical investigation and validation of sustainability indicators for the assessment of energy sources in India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    11. Li, Tao & Li, Ang & Guo, Xiaopeng, 2020. "The sustainable development-oriented development and utilization of renewable energy industry——A comprehensive analysis of MCDM methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    12. Rivero-Iglesias, Jose M. & Puente, Javier & Fernandez, Isabel & León, Omar, 2023. "Integrated model for the assessment of power generation alternatives through analytic hierarchy process and a fuzzy inference system. Case study of Spain," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 563-581.
    13. Ozorhon, Beliz & Batmaz, Arda & Caglayan, Semih, 2018. "Generating a framework to facilitate decision making in renewable energy investments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 217-226.
    14. Deveci, Kaan & Güler, Önder, 2020. "A CMOPSO based multi-objective optimization of renewable energy planning: Case of Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 578-590.
    15. Çolak, Murat & Kaya, İhsan, 2017. "Prioritization of renewable energy alternatives by using an integrated fuzzy MCDM model: A real case application for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 840-853.
    16. Mousavi, M. & Gitinavard, H. & Mousavi, S.M., 2017. "A soft computing based-modified ELECTRE model for renewable energy policy selection with unknown information," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P1), pages 774-787.
    17. Ratanakuakangwan, Sudlop & Morita, Hiroshi, 2022. "Multi-aspect efficiency measurement of multi-objective energy planning model dealing with uncertainties," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    18. 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.
    19. 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).
    20. Madjid Tavana & Akram Shaabani & Francisco Javier Santos-Arteaga & Iman Raeesi Vanani, 2020. "A Review of Uncertain Decision-Making Methods in Energy Management Using Text Mining and Data Analytics," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-23, August.

    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:energy:v:290:y:2024:i:c:s0360544223035685. 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.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    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.