IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v11y2018i4p757-d138302.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Criteria Analysis of Electricity Generation Scenarios for Sustainable Energy Planning in Pakistan

Author

Listed:
  • Nayyar Hussain Mirjat

    (Department of Electrical Engineering, Mehran University of Engineering and Technology, Jamshoro 76062, Pakistan)

  • Mohammad Aslam Uqaili

    (Department of Electrical Engineering, Mehran University of Engineering and Technology, Jamshoro 76062, Pakistan)

  • Khanji Harijan

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mehran University of Engineering and Technology, Jamshoro 76062, Pakistan)

  • Mohd Wazir Mustafa

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University Technology Malaysia (UTM), 81310 UTM Skudai, Johor Bahru 81310, Malaysia)

  • Md. Mizanur Rahman

    (Department of Thermo Fluids, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University Technology Malaysia (UTM), 81310 UTM Skudai, Johor Bahru 81310, Malaysia)

  • M. Waris Ali Khan

    (Faculty of Industrial Management, University Malaysia Pahang (UMP), Lebuhraya Tun Razak, 26300 Gambang, Kuantan 26300, Malaysia)

Abstract

The now over a decade-long electricity crisis in Pakistan has adversely affected the socio-economic development of the country. This situation is mainly due to a lack of sustainable energy planning and policy formulation. In this context, energy models can be of great help but only a handful of such efforts have been undertaken in Pakistan. Two key shortcomings pertaining to energy models lead to their low utilization in developing countries. First, the models do not effectively make decisions, but rather provide a set of alternatives based on modeling parameters; and secondly, the complexity of these models is often poorly understood by the decision makers. As such, in this study, the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) methodology of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) has been used for the sustainability assessment of energy modeling results for long-term electricity planning. The four scenario alternatives developed in the energy modeling effort, Reference (REF), Renewable Energy Technologies (RET), Clean Coal Maximum (CCM) and Energy Efficiency and Conservation (EEC), have been ranked using the Expert Choice ® tool based on the AHP methodology. The AHP decision support framework of this study revealed the EEC scenario as the most favorable electricity generation scenario followed by the REF, RET and CCM scenarios. Besides that, this study proposes policy recommendations to undertake integrated energy modeling and decision analysis for sustainable energy planning in Pakistan.

Suggested Citation

  • Nayyar Hussain Mirjat & Mohammad Aslam Uqaili & Khanji Harijan & Mohd Wazir Mustafa & Md. Mizanur Rahman & M. Waris Ali Khan, 2018. "Multi-Criteria Analysis of Electricity Generation Scenarios for Sustainable Energy Planning in Pakistan," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-33, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:11:y:2018:i:4:p:757-:d:138302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/11/4/757/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/11/4/757/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mirza, Umar K. & Ahmad, Nasir & Majeed, Tariq & Harijan, Khanji, 2007. "Wind energy development in Pakistan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(9), pages 2179-2190, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Vargas, Luis G., 1990. "An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 2-8, September.
    4. Sheikh, Munawar A., 2009. "Renewable energy resource potential in Pakistan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2696-2702, December.
    5. Daim, Tugrul & Yates, Diane & Peng, Yicheng & Jimenez, Bertha, 2009. "Technology assessment for clean energy technologies: The case of the Pacific Northwest," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 232-243.
    6. Ribeiro, Fernando & Ferreira, Paula & Araújo, Madalena, 2013. "Evaluating future scenarios for the power generation sector using a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tool: The Portuguese case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 126-136.
    7. Soma, Katrine, 2003. "How to involve stakeholders in fisheries management--a country case study in Trinidad and Tobago," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 47-58, January.
    8. 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.
    9. Kumar Biswajit Debnath & Monjur Mourshed, 2018. "Challenges and gaps for energy planning models in the developing-world context," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 172-184, March.
    10. Connolly, D. & Lund, H. & Mathiesen, B.V. & Leahy, M., 2010. "A review of computer tools for analysing the integration of renewable energy into various energy systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 1059-1082, April.
    11. Mourmouris, J.C. & Potolias, C., 2013. "A multi-criteria methodology for energy planning and developing renewable energy sources at a regional level: A case study Thassos, Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 522-530.
    12. Phdungsilp, Aumnad & Wuttipornpun, Teeradej, 2013. "Analyses of the decarbonizing Thailand's energy system toward low-carbon futures," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 187-197.
    13. Lee, Amy H.I. & Chen, Hsing Hung & Kang, He-Yau, 2009. "Multi-criteria decision making on strategic selection of wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 120-126.
    14. Sahabmanesh, Aref & Saboohi, Yadollah, 2017. "Model of sustainable development of energy system, case of Hamedan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 66-79.
    15. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    16. Mirjat, Nayyar Hussain & Uqaili, Mohammad Aslam & Harijan, Khanji & Valasai, Gordhan Das & Shaikh, Faheemullah & Waris, M., 2017. "A review of energy and power planning and policies of Pakistan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 110-127.
    17. 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.
    18. Nigim, K. & Munier, N. & Green, J., 2004. "Pre-feasibility MCDM tools to aid communities in prioritizing local viable renewable energy sources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 1775-1791.
    19. Kahraman, Cengiz & Kaya, İhsan & Cebi, Selcuk, 2009. "A comparative analysis for multiattribute selection among renewable energy alternatives using fuzzy axiomatic design and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1603-1616.
    20. Heinrich, G. & Basson, L. & Cohen, B. & Howells, M. & Petrie, J., 2007. "Ranking and selection of power expansion alternatives for multiple objectives under uncertainty," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 2350-2369.
    21. 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.
    22. Giatrakos, Georgios P. & Tsoutsos, Theocharis D. & Zografakis, Nikos, 2009. "Sustainable power planning for the island of Crete," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1222-1238, April.
    23. Dodgson, JS & Spackman, M & Pearman, A & Phillips, LD, 2009. "Multi-criteria analysis: a manual," Economic History Working Papers 12761, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Economic History.
    24. Saaty, Thomas L. & Vargas, Luis G., 1987. "Uncertainty and rank order in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 107-117, October.
    25. Valasai, Gordhan Das & Uqaili, Muhammad Aslam & Memon, HafeezUr Rahman & Samoo, Saleem Raza & Mirjat, Nayyar Hussain & Harijan, Khanji, 2017. "Overcoming electricity crisis in Pakistan: A review of sustainable electricity options," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 734-745.
    26. Elkarmi, Fawwaz & Mustafa, Isam, 1993. "Increasing the utilization of solar energy technologies (SET) in Jordan : Analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 978-984, September.
    27. Pereira Jr., Amaro Olimpio & Soares, Jeferson Borghetti & de Oliveira, Ricardo Gorini & de Queiroz, Renato Pinto, 2008. "Energy in Brazil: Toward sustainable development?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 73-83, January.
    28. Atom MIRAKYAN & Laurent LELAIT & Nikolai KHOMENKO & Igor KAIKOV, 2009. "Methodological Framework for the analysis and development of a sustainable, integrated, regional energy plan - A French region case study," EcoMod2009 21500066, EcoMod.
    29. Stewart, Theodor J. & French, Simon & Rios, Jesus, 2013. "Integrating multicriteria decision analysis and scenario planning—Review and extension," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 679-688.
    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. 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.
    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. Muhammad Riaz & Wojciech Sałabun & Hafiz Muhammad Athar Farid & Nawazish Ali & Jarosław Wątróbski, 2020. "A Robust q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy Information Aggregation Using Einstein Operations with Application to Sustainable Energy Planning Decision Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-39, May.
    4. Mirjat, Nayyar Hussain & Uqaili, Mohammad Aslam & Harijan, Khanji & Valasai, Gordhan Das & Shaikh, Faheemullah & Waris, M., 2017. "A review of energy and power planning and policies of Pakistan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 110-127.
    5. Solangi, Yasir Ahmed & Longsheng, Cheng & Shah, Syed Ahsan Ali, 2021. "Assessing and overcoming the renewable energy barriers for sustainable development in Pakistan: An integrated AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 209-222.
    6. Ghimire, Laxman Prasad & Kim, Yeonbae, 2018. "An analysis on barriers to renewable energy development in the context of Nepal using AHP," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 129(PA), pages 446-456.
    7. Sellak, Hamza & Ouhbi, Brahim & Frikh, Bouchra & Palomares, Iván, 2017. "Towards next-generation energy planning decision-making: An expert-based framework for intelligent decision support," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1544-1577.
    8. Leezna Saleem & Imran Ahmad Siddiqui & Intikhab Ulfat, 2021. "The prioritization of renewable energy technologies in Pakistan: An urgent need," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2021(1), pages 81-103.
    9. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    10. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Karabulut, Yağmur, 2017. "Energy project performance evaluation with sustainability perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 549-560.
    11. Thushara, De Silva M. & Hornberger, George M. & Baroud, Hiba, 2019. "Decision analysis to support the choice of a future power generation pathway for Sri Lanka," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C), pages 680-697.
    12. Philip Mayer & Christopher Stephen Ball & Stefan Vögele & Wilhelm Kuckshinrichs & Dirk Rübbelke, 2019. "Analyzing Brexit: Implications for the Electricity System of Great Britain," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-27, August.
    13. Abbas Mardani & Ahmad Jusoh & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Zainab Khalifah, 2015. "Sustainable and Renewable Energy: An Overview of the Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Making Techniques and Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-38, October.
    14. Mirakyan, Atom & De Guio, Roland, 2013. "Integrated energy planning in cities and territories: A review of methods and tools," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 289-297.
    15. Katal, Fatemeh & Fazelpour, Farivar, 2018. "Multi-criteria evaluation and priority analysis of different types of existing power plants in Iran: An optimized energy planning system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 163-177.
    16. Bilgili, Faik & Zarali, Fulya & Ilgün, Miraç Fatih & Dumrul, Cüneyt & Dumrul, Yasemin, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using ‌intuitionistic‌ ‌fuzzy‌-TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1443-1458.
    17. Ahmad, Salman & Nadeem, Abid & Akhanova, Gulzhanat & Houghton, Tom & Muhammad-Sukki, Firdaus, 2017. "Multi-criteria evaluation of renewable and nuclear resources for electricity generation in Kazakhstan," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1880-1891.
    18. Çelikbilek, Yakup & Tüysüz, Fatih, 2016. "An integrated grey based multi-criteria decision making approach for the evaluation of renewable energy sources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P1), pages 1246-1258.
    19. Campos-Guzmán, Verónica & García-Cáscales, M. Socorro & Espinosa, Nieves & Urbina, Antonio, 2019. "Life Cycle Analysis with Multi-Criteria Decision Making: A review of approaches for the sustainability evaluation of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 343-366.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jeners:v:11:y:2018:i:4:p:757-:d:138302. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.