IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v8y2014i1p59-78d43928.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for Evaluation of Combined Heat and Power Units

Author

Listed:
  • Haichao Wang

    (Department of Energy Technology, Aalto University School of Engineering, P.O. Box 14100, FI-00076, 02150 Espoo, Finland)

  • Wenling Jiao

    (School of Municipal & Environmental Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150090, Heilongjiang, China)

  • Risto Lahdelma

    (Department of Energy Technology, Aalto University School of Engineering, P.O. Box 14100, FI-00076, 02150 Espoo, Finland)

  • Chuanzhi Zhu

    (School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Jilin Jianzhu University, Changchun 130118, Jilin, China)

  • Pinghua Zou

    (School of Municipal & Environmental Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150090, Heilongjiang, China)

Abstract

Combined heat and power (CHP) is a promising technology that can contribute to energy efficiency and environmental protection. More CHP-based energy systems are planned for the future. This makes the evaluation and selection of CHP systems very important. In this paper, 16 CHP units representing different technologies are taken into account for multicriteria evaluation with respect to the end users’ requirements. These CHP technologies cover a wide range of power outputs and fuel types. They are evaluated from the energy, economy and environment (3E) points of view, specifically including the criteria of efficiency, investment cost, electricity cost, heat cost, CO 2 production and footprint. Uncertainties and imprecision are common both in criteria measurements and weights, therefore the stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA) model is used in aiding this decision making problem. These uncertainties are treated better using a probability distribution function and Monte Carlo simulation in the model. Moreover, the idea of “feasible weight space (FWS)” which represents the union of all preference information from decision makers (DMs) is proposed. A complementary judgment matrix (CJM) is introduced to determine the FWS. It can be found that the idea of FWS plus CJM is well compatible with SMAA and thus make the evaluation reliable.

Suggested Citation

  • Haichao Wang & Wenling Jiao & Risto Lahdelma & Chuanzhi Zhu & Pinghua Zou, 2014. "Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for Evaluation of Combined Heat and Power Units," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:8:y:2014:i:1:p:59-78:d:43928
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/8/1/59/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/8/1/59/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tervonen, Tommi & Lahdelma, Risto, 2007. "Implementing stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(2), pages 500-513, April.
    2. Lahdelma, Risto & Hokkanen, Joonas & Salminen, Pekka, 1998. "SMAA - Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 137-143, April.
    3. Lund, H. & Siupsinskas, G. & Martinaitis, V., 2005. "Implementation strategy for small CHP-plants in a competitive market: the case of Lithuania," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 214-227, November.
    4. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    5. 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.
    6. Lahdelma, Risto & Miettinen, Kaisa & Salminen, Pekka, 2003. "Ordinal criteria in stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 117-127, May.
    7. Rong, Aiying & Lahdelma, Risto, 2007. "Efficient algorithms for combined heat and power production planning under the deregulated electricity market," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(2), pages 1219-1245, January.
    8. Angilella, Silvia & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore, 2015. "Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis for the Choquet integral preference model and the scale construction problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 172-182.
    9. Risto Lahdelma & Pekka Salminen, 2001. "SMAA-2: Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for Group Decision Making," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 444-454, June.
    10. Rong, Aiying & Hakonen, Henri & Lahdelma, Risto, 2006. "An efficient linear model and optimisation algorithm for multi-site combined heat and power production," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 612-632, January.
    11. Afgan, Naim H. & Pilavachi, Petros A. & Carvalho, Maria G., 2007. "Multi-criteria evaluation of natural gas resources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 704-713, January.
    12. Hawkes, A.D. & Leach, M.A., 2007. "Cost-effective operating strategy for residential micro-combined heat and power," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 711-723.
    13. Afgan, Naim H. & Carvalho, Maria G., 2002. "Multi-criteria assessment of new and renewable energy power plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 739-755.
    14. Tylock, Steven M. & Seager, Thomas P. & Snell, Jeff & Bennett, Erin R. & Sweet, Don, 2012. "Energy management under policy and technology uncertainty," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 156-163.
    15. Xu, Jianzhong & Sui, Jun & Li, Bingyu & Yang, Minlin, 2010. "Research, development and the prospect of combined cooling, heating, and power systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 4361-4367.
    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. Chenghong Gu & Da Xie & Junbo Sun & Xitian Wang & Qian Ai, 2015. "Optimal Operation of Combined Heat and Power System Based on Forecasted Energy Prices in Real-Time Markets," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Yang, Zhe & Yang, Kan & Wang, Yufeng & Su, Lyuwen & Hu, Hu, 2021. "Long-term multi-objective power generation operation for cascade reservoirs and risk decision making under stochastic uncertainties," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 313-330.

    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. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    2. Silvia Angilella & Maria Rosaria Pappalardo, 2022. "Performance assessment of energy companies employing Hierarchy Stochastic Multi-Attribute Acceptability Analysis," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 299-370, March.
    3. De Matteis, Domenico & Ishizaka, Alessio & Resce, Giuliano, 2019. "The ‘postcode lottery’ of the Italian public health bill analysed with the hierarchy Stochastic Multiobjective Acceptability Analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    4. Wang, Haichao & Duanmu, Lin & Lahdelma, Risto & Li, Xiangli, 2017. "Developing a multicriteria decision support framework for CHP based combined district heating systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 345-368.
    5. Song, Lianlian & Fu, Yelin & Zhou, Peng & Lai, Kin Keung, 2017. "Measuring national energy performance via Energy Trilemma Index: A Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 313-319.
    6. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    7. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. García Cáceres, Rafael Guillermo & Aráoz Durand, Julián Arturo & Gómez, Fernando Palacios, 2009. "Integral analysis method - IAM," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(3), pages 891-903, February.
    9. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Stochastic preference analysis in numerical preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 628-633.
    10. Giuseppe Pinto & Elnaz Abdollahi & Alfonso Capozzoli & Laura Savoldi & Risto Lahdelma, 2019. "Optimization and Multicriteria Evaluation of Carbon-neutral Technologies for District Heating," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, April.
    11. Song, Shiling & Yang, Feng & Yu, Pingxiang & Xie, Jianhui, 2021. "Stochastic multi-attribute acceptability analysis with numerous alternatives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(2), pages 621-633.
    12. Pelissari, Renata & Oliveira, Maria Célia & Ben Amor, Sarah & Abackerli, Alvaro José, 2019. "A new FlowSort-based method to deal with information imperfections in sorting decision-making problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(1), pages 235-246.
    13. Durbach, Ian N., 2009. "The use of the SMAA acceptability index in descriptive decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(3), pages 1229-1237, August.
    14. Abdellah Menou & Risto Lahdelma & Pekka Salminen, 2022. "Multicriteria Decision Aiding for Planning Renewable Power Production at Moroccan Airports," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-20, July.
    15. Kadziński, Miłosz & Tervonen, Tommi, 2013. "Robust multi-criteria ranking with additive value models and holistic pair-wise preference statements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 169-180.
    16. Liu, Jiapeng & Liao, Xiuwu & Huang, Wei & Liao, Xianzhao, 2019. "Market segmentation: A multiple criteria approach combining preference analysis and segmentation decision," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-13.
    17. Wang, Guangchao & Jia, Ning & Ma, Shoufeng & Qi, Hang, 2014. "A rank-dependent bi-criterion equilibrium model for stochastic transportation environment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 511-529.
    18. Raffaele Lagravinese & Paolo Liberati & Giuliano Resce, 2020. "Measuring Health Inequality in US: A Composite Index Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 921-946, February.
    19. Durbach, Ian & Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2014. "The analytic hierarchy process with stochastic judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(2), pages 552-559.
    20. Christoph Graf & Magdalena Six, 2014. "The effect of information on the quality of decisions," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 22(4), pages 647-662, December.

    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:8:y:2014:i:1:p:59-78:d:43928. 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.