IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i8p3287-d1375948.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) to Select the Most Sustainable Power-Generating Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Fatemeh Parvaneh

    (Construction Engineering and Management, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada)

  • Ahmed Hammad

    (Construction Engineering and Management, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada)

Abstract

In response to the growing importance of sustainability and regulatory pressures, companies are increasingly engaging in sustainable projects to mitigate environmental and social harm. Therefore, it is crucial to incorporate sustainability considerations during selecting construction projects in the feasibility phase. This study aims to identify a comprehensive set of sustainability criteria and sub-criteria to help the owners of power-generating plants to select the most sustainable technology for their new projects. Sixteen criteria are identified and categorized under the pillars of sustainability: economic, social, and environmental, plus the technical category. To illustrate practical application, a case study demonstrates the use of these essential sustainability criteria through a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model for power-generating technology ranking. The results suggest that when stakeholders’ perspectives are weighted approximately equally, considering all sustainability pillars, natural gas with carbon capture is favored for sustainability. A three-scenario sensitivity analysis was performed involving expert opinions from one of the largest power-generating companies in Canada. This integrated generic model can be utilized by industry experts to apply multi-dimensional rational decision-making techniques to solve the complex problem of selecting the most sustainable alternative in construction projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Fatemeh Parvaneh & Ahmed Hammad, 2024. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) to Select the Most Sustainable Power-Generating Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-32, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3287-:d:1375948
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3287/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3287/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernest H. Forman & Saul I. Gass, 2001. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process---An Exposition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 469-486, August.
    2. Huang, Xiaoxia, 2008. "Portfolio selection with a new definition of risk," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 351-357, April.
    3. Madurai Elavarasan, Rajvikram & Shafiullah, GM & Raju, Kannadasan & Mudgal, Vijay & Arif, M.T. & Jamal, Taskin & Subramanian, Senthilkumar & Sriraja Balaguru, V.S. & Reddy, K.S. & Subramaniam, Umashan, 2020. "COVID-19: Impact analysis and recommendations for power sector operation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    4. Mohammad Masfiqul Alam Bhuiyan & Ahmed Hammad, 2023. "A Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision Support System for Selecting the Most Sustainable Structural Material for a Multistory Building Construction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-36, February.
    5. Kajal Chatterjee & Sheikh Ahmed Hossain & Samarjit Kar, 2018. "Prioritization of project proposals in portfolio management using fuzzy AHP," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 55(2), pages 478-501, June.
    6. Medaglia, Andres L. & Graves, Samuel B. & Ringuest, Jeffrey L., 2007. "A multiobjective evolutionary approach for linearly constrained project selection under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(3), pages 869-894, June.
    7. Stein, Eric W., 2013. "A comprehensive multi-criteria model to rank electric energy production technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 640-654.
    8. Nomeda Dobrovolskienė & Anastasija Pozniak & Manuela Tvaronavičienė, 2021. "Assessment of the Sustainability of a Real Estate Project Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    9. Teller, Juliane & Kock, Alexander, 2013. "An Empirical Investigation on How Portfolio Risk Management Influences Project Portfolio Success," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 63248, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    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. 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.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    3. Sener, Can & Fthenakis, Vasilis, 2014. "Energy policy and financing options to achieve solar energy grid penetration targets: Accounting for external costs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 854-868.
    4. Sharifah Nurain Syed Nasir & Norasikin Ahmad Ludin & Ahmad Afif Safwan Mohd Radzi & Mirratul Mukminah Junedi & Norhashimah Ramli & Anezah Marsan & Zul Fauzi Azlan Mohd & Muhamad Roszaini Roslan & Zulf, 2023. "Lockdown impact on energy consumption in university building," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(10), pages 12051-12070, October.
    5. Vijayaraja Loganathan & Dhanasekar Ravikumar & Rupa Kesavan & Kanakasri Venkatesan & Raadha Saminathan & Raju Kannadasan & Mahalingam Sudhakaran & Mohammed H. Alsharif & Zong Woo Geem & Junhee Hong, 2022. "A Case Study on Renewable Energy Sources, Power Demand, and Policies in the States of South India—Development of a Thermoelectric Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-29, July.
    6. Wang, Richard & Ye, Zhongnan & Lu, Miaojia & Hsu, Shu-Chien, 2022. "Understanding post-pandemic work-from-home behaviours and community level energy reduction via agent-based modelling," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    7. Ha, Le Thanh, 2022. "Storm after the Gloomy days: Influences of COVID-19 pandemic on volatility of the energy market," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    8. María Pilar de la Cruz López & Juan José Cartelle Barros & Alfredo del Caño Gochi & Manuel Lara Coira, 2021. "New Approach for Managing Sustainability in Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-27, June.
    9. Sandra E. Strasser & Ceyhun Ozgur & David L. Schroeder, 2002. "Selecting a Business College Major: An Analysis of Criteria and Choice Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process," American Journal of Business, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 17(2), pages 47-56.
    10. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Haddad, Brahim & Liazid, Abdelkrim & Ferreira, Paula, 2017. "A multi-criteria approach to rank renewables for the Algerian electricity system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 462-472.
    12. Assadi, Mohammad Reza & Ataebi, Melikasadat & Ataebi, Elmira sadat & Hasani, Aliakbar, 2022. "Prioritization of renewable energy resources based on sustainable management approach using simultaneous evaluation of criteria and alternatives: A case study on Iran's electricity industry," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 820-832.
    13. Reda M. S. Abdulaal & Anas A. Makki & Isam Y. Al-Filali, 2023. "A Novel Hybrid Approach for Prioritizing Investment Initiatives to Achieve Financial Sustainability in Higher Education Institutions Using MEREC-G and RATMI," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-18, August.
    14. Pei Li, 2016. "The New Product Online Evaluation by Expert Based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process Method," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(8), pages 265-265, August.
    15. Burleyson, Casey D. & Rahman, Aowabin & Rice, Jennie S. & Smith, Amanda D. & Voisin, Nathalie, 2021. "Multiscale effects masked the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on electricity demand in the United States," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    16. Khameis Al Abdouli & Khalid Hussein & Dawit Ghebreyesus & Hatim O. Sharif, 2019. "Coastal Runoff in the United Arab Emirates—The Hazard and Opportunity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-19, September.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Yael Grushka-Cockayne & Bert De Reyck & Zeger Degraeve, 2008. "An Integrated Decision-Making Approach for Improving European Air Traffic Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(8), pages 1395-1409, August.
    20. Joaquín Pérez, José L. Jimeno, Ethel Mokotoff, 2001. "Another potential strong shortcoming of AHP," Doctorado en Economía- documentos de trabajo 8/02, Programa de doctorado en Economía. Universidad de Alcalá., revised 01 Jun 2002.

    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:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3287-:d:1375948. 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.