IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v34y2009i1p112-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of a multi-criteria assessment model for ranking of renewable and non-renewable transportation fuel vehicles

Author

Listed:
  • Safaei Mohamadabadi, H.
  • Tichkowsky, G.
  • Kumar, A.

Abstract

Several factors, including economical, environmental, and social factors, are involved in selection of the best fuel-based vehicles for road transportation. This leads to a multi-criteria selection problem for multi-alternatives. In this study, a multi-criteria assessment model was developed to rank different road transportation fuel-based vehicles (both renewable and non-renewable) using a method called Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment and Evaluations (PROMETHEE). This method combines qualitative and quantitative criteria to rank various alternatives. In this study, vehicles based on gasoline, gasoline–electric (hybrid), E85 ethanol, diesel, B100 biodiesel, and compressed natural gas (CNG) were considered as alternatives. These alternatives were ranked based on five criteria: vehicle cost, fuel cost, distance between refueling stations, number of vehicle options available to the consumer, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per unit distance traveled. In addition, sensitivity analyses were performed to study the impact of changes in various parameters on final ranking. Two base cases and several alternative scenarios were evaluated. In the base case scenario with higher weight on economical parameters, gasoline-based vehicle was ranked higher than other vehicles. In the base case scenario with higher weight on environmental parameters, hybrid vehicle was ranked first followed by biodiesel-based vehicle.

Suggested Citation

  • Safaei Mohamadabadi, H. & Tichkowsky, G. & Kumar, A., 2009. "Development of a multi-criteria assessment model for ranking of renewable and non-renewable transportation fuel vehicles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 112-125.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:34:y:2009:i:1:p:112-125
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2008.09.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544208002442
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2008.09.004?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. Mladineo, N. & Margeta, J. & Brans, J.P. & Mareschal, B., 1987. "Multicriteria ranking of alternative locations for small scale hydro plants," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 215-222, August.
    2. Le Teno, J. F. & Mareschal, B., 1998. "An interval version of PROMETHEE for the comparison of building products' design with ill-defined data on environmental quality," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 522-529, September.
    3. Madlener, Reinhard & Stagl, Sigrid, 2005. "Sustainability-guided promotion of renewable electricity generation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 147-167, April.
    4. Kangas, Annika S. & Kangas, Jyrki & Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2006. "Using SMAA-2 method with dependent uncertainties for strategic forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 113-125, November.
    5. Doukas, Haris & Patlitzianas, Konstantinos D. & Psarras, John, 2006. "Supporting sustainable electricity technologies in Greece using MCDM," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 129-136, June.
    6. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: the Prométhée method," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9307, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Haralambopoulos, D.A. & Polatidis, H., 2003. "Renewable energy projects: structuring a multi-criteria group decision-making framework," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 961-973.
    8. Topcu, Y.I & Ulengin, F, 2004. "Energy for the future: An integrated decision aid for the case of Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 137-154.
    9. Brans, J. P. & Vincke, Ph. & Mareschal, B., 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: The method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 228-238, February.
    10. Goumas, M. & Lygerou, V., 2000. "An extension of the PROMETHEE method for decision making in fuzzy environment: Ranking of alternative energy exploitation projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 606-613, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 2604-2622.
    5. Cavallaro, Fausto, 2010. "A comparative assessment of thin-film photovoltaic production processes using the ELECTRE III method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 463-474, January.
    6. 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.
    7. de Melo, Conrado Augustus & Jannuzzi, Gilberto de Martino & Ferreira Tripodi, Aline, 2013. "Evaluating public policy mechanisms for climate change mitigation in Brazilian buildings sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1200-1211.
    8. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos & Livanos, Georgios A., 2017. "Evaluation of future sustainable electricity generation alternatives: The case of a Greek island," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 775-787.
    9. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    10. Marco Rogna, 2019. "A First-Phase Screening Device for Site Selection of Large-Scale Solar Plants with an Application to Italy," BEMPS - Bozen Economics & Management Paper Series BEMPS57, Faculty of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen.
    11. Haralambopoulos, D.A. & Polatidis, H., 2003. "Renewable energy projects: structuring a multi-criteria group decision-making framework," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 961-973.
    12. Rogna, Marco, 2020. "A first-phase screening method for site selection of large-scale solar plants with an application to Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    13. Topcu, Y.I & Ulengin, F, 2004. "Energy for the future: An integrated decision aid for the case of Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 137-154.
    14. 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.
    15. Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid & Madlener, Reinhard & Omann, Ines, 2009. "Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 1063-1074, September.
    16. Troldborg, Mads & Heslop, Simon & Hough, Rupert L., 2014. "Assessing the sustainability of renewable energy technologies using multi-criteria analysis: Suitability of approach for national-scale assessments and associated uncertainties," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1173-1184.
    17. Wang, Ying-Ming & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling, 2006. "Environmental impact assessment using the evidential reasoning approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1885-1913, November.
    18. Halouani, N. & Chabchoub, H. & Martel, J.-M., 2009. "PROMETHEE-MD-2T method for project selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(3), pages 841-849, June.
    19. Kokaraki, Nikoleta & Hopfe, Christina J. & Robinson, Elaine & Nikolaidou, Elli, 2019. "Testing the reliability of deterministic multi-criteria decision-making methods using building performance simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 991-1007.
    20. Mahsa Ghandi & Abbas Roozbahani, 2020. "Risk Management of Drinking Water Supply in Critical Conditions Using Fuzzy PROMETHEE V Technique," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(2), pages 595-615, January.

    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:34:y:2009:i:1:p:112-125. 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.