IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i6p556-d72016.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Systems Using Fuzzy Shannon Entropy and Fuzzy TOPSIS

Author

Listed:
  • Fausto Cavallaro

    (Department of Economics, Management, Society and Institutions (EGSI), University of Molise, Via De Sanctis, Campobasso 86100, Italy)

  • Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas

    (Research Institute of Smart Building Technologies, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio ave. 11, Vilnius LT-10223, Lithuania)

  • Saulius Raslanas

    (Department of Construction Economics and Property Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio ave. 11, Vilnius LT-10223, Lithuania)

Abstract

Combined heat and power (CHP) or cogeneration can play a strategic role in addressing environmental issues and climate change. CHP systems require less fuel than separate heat and power systems in order to produce the same amount of energy saving primary energy, improving the security of the supply. Because less fuel is combusted, greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollutants are reduced. If we are to consider the CHP system as “sustainable”, we must include in its assessment not only energetic performance but also environmental and economic aspects, presenting a multicriteria issue. The purpose of the paper is to apply a fuzzy multicriteria methodology to the assessment of five CHP commercial technologies. Specifically, the combination of the fuzzy Shannon’s entropy and the fuzzy Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) approach will be tested for this purpose. Shannon’s entropy concept, using interval data such as the α-cut, is a particularly suitable technique for assigning weights to criteria—it does not require a decision-making (DM) to assign a weight to the criteria. To rank the proposed alternatives, a fuzzy TOPSIS method has been applied. It is based on the principle that the chosen alternative should be as close as possible to the positive ideal solution and be as far as possible from the negative ideal solution. The proposed approach provides a useful technical–scientific decision-making tool that can effectively support, in a consistent and transparent way, the assessment of various CHP technologies from a sustainable point of view.

Suggested Citation

  • Fausto Cavallaro & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Saulius Raslanas, 2016. "Evaluation of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Systems Using Fuzzy Shannon Entropy and Fuzzy TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-21, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:6:p:556-:d:72016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/6/556/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/6/556/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kwangjai Won & Eun-Sung Chung & Sung-Uk Choi, 2015. "Parametric Assessment of Water Use Vulnerability Variations Using SWAT and Fuzzy TOPSIS Coupled with Entropy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Simona Kildienė & Arturas Kaklauskas & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2011. "COPRAS based Comparative Analysis of the European Country Management Capabilities within the Construction Sector in the Time of Crisis," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 417-434, February.
    3. Craig W. Kirkwood & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1985. "Ranking with Partial Information: A Method and an Application," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 38-48, February.
    4. Huiru Zhao & Sen Guo, 2014. "Selecting Green Supplier of Thermal Power Equipment by Using a Hybrid MCDM Method for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-19, January.
    5. Mareschal, Bertrand, 1988. "Weight stability intervals in multicriteria decision aid," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 54-64, January.
    6. 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.
    7. Nozer D. Singpurwalla & Jane M. Booker, 2004. "Membership Functions and Probability Measures of Fuzzy Sets," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 99, pages 867-877, January.
    8. Sanaye, Sepehr & Mohammadi Nasab, Amir, 2012. "Modeling and optimizing a CHP system for natural gas pressure reduction plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 358-369.
    9. Seijo, Sandra & del Campo, Inés & Echanobe, Javier & García-Sedano, Javier, 2016. "Modeling and multi-objective optimization of a complex CHP process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 309-319.
    10. Robert T. Eckenrode, 1965. "Weighting Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 180-192, November.
    11. Paul J. H. Schoemaker & C. Carter Waid, 1982. "An Experimental Comparison of Different Approaches to Determining Weights in Additive Utility Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 182-196, February.
    12. 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.
    13. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Shi, Guo-Hua & Zhang, Xu-Tao, 2008. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model for trigeneration system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 3823-3832, October.
    14. 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.
    15. Wang, Haichao & Yin, Wusong & Abdollahi, Elnaz & Lahdelma, Risto & Jiao, Wenling, 2015. "Modelling and optimization of CHP based district heating system with renewable energy production and energy storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 401-421.
    16. Golan, Amos & Judge, George G. & Miller, Douglas, 1996. "Maximum Entropy Econometrics," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1488, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    17. Liang, Gin-Shuh, 1999. "Fuzzy MCDM based on ideal and anti-ideal concepts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 682-691, February.
    18. Carvalho, Monica & Lozano, Miguel A. & Serra, Luis M., 2012. "Multicriteria synthesis of trigeneration systems considering economic and environmental aspects," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 245-254.
    19. Cavallaro, Fausto, 2010. "Fuzzy TOPSIS approach for assessing thermal-energy storage in concentrated solar power (CSP) systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 496-503, February.
    20. Erol, İsmail & Sencer, Safiye & Özmen, Aslı & Searcy, Cory, 2014. "Fuzzy MCDM framework for locating a nuclear power plant in Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 186-197.
    21. Erol, Ismail & Sencer, Safiye & Sari, Ramazan, 2011. "A new fuzzy multi-criteria framework for measuring sustainability performance of a supply chain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1088-1100, April.
    22. Vincenzo Liso & Yingru Zhao & Wenyuan Yang & Mads Pagh Nielsen, 2015. "Modelling of a Solid Oxide Fuel Cell CHP System Coupled with a Hot Water Storage Tank for a Single Household," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-19, March.
    23. Abdolreza Yazdani-Chamzini & Mohammad Majid Fouladgar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & S. Hamzeh Haji Moini, 2013. "Selecting the optimal renewable energy using multi criteria decision making," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 957-978, November.
    24. Ebrahimi, Masood & Keshavarz, Ali, 2013. "Sizing the prime mover of a residential micro-combined cooling heating and power (CCHP) system by multi-criteria sizing method for different climates," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 291-301.
    25. F. Hutton Barron & Bruce E. Barrett, 1996. "Decision Quality Using Ranked Attribute Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(11), pages 1515-1523, November.
    26. 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.
    27. Fausto Cavallaro, 2015. "A Takagi-Sugeno Fuzzy Inference System for Developing a Sustainability Index of Biomass," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-13, September.
    28. Brian C. H. Steele & Angelika Heinzel, 2001. "Materials for fuel-cell technologies," Nature, Nature, vol. 414(6861), pages 345-352, November.
    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. Min, Jeoung-Sik & Lim, Seul-Ye & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2019. "Economic output-maximizing share of combined heat and power generation: The case of South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1087-1091.
    2. Mu-Hsin Chang & James J. H. Liou & Huai-Wei Lo, 2019. "A Hybrid MCDM Model for Evaluating Strategic Alliance Partners in the Green Biopharmaceutical Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, July.
    3. Cavallaro, Fausto & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Streimikiene, Dalia & Mardani, Abbas, 2019. "Assessment of concentrated solar power (CSP) technologies based on a modified intuitionistic fuzzy topsis and trigonometric entropy weights," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 258-270.
    4. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ieva Ubarte & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2017. "MCDM Assessment of a Healthy and Safe Built Environment According to Sustainable Development Principles: A Practical Neighborhood Approach in Vilnius," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-30, April.
    5. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Payam Khazaelpour & Fausto Cavallaro, 2018. "The Multi-Aspect Criterion in the PMADM Outline and Its Possible Application to Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, November.
    6. Santoso Wibowo & Srimannarayana Grandhi, 2018. "Multicriteria Assessment of Combined Heat and Power Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-11, September.
    7. Mohamad Shahiir Saidin & Lai Soon Lee & Siti Mahani Marjugi & Muhammad Zaini Ahmad & Hsin-Vonn Seow, 2023. "Fuzzy Method Based on the Removal Effects of Criteria (MEREC) for Determining Objective Weights in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Problems," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Wenyin Yang & Lin Liu & Xiaobao Yu, 2017. "Evaluating the Comprehensive Benefit of Group-Affiliated New Energy Power Generation Enterprises for Sustainability: Based on a Combined Technique of STBI and TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Yuhuan Zhang & Huapu Lu & Shengxi Luo & Zhiyuan Sun & Wencong Qu, 2017. "Human-Scale Sustainability Assessment of Urban Intersections Based upon Multi-Source Big Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-22, July.
    10. Romualdas Bausys & Giruta Kazakeviciute-Januskeviciene & Fausto Cavallaro & Ana Usovaite, 2020. "Algorithm Selection for Edge Detection in Satellite Images by Neutrosophic WASPAS Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-24, January.
    11. Jiuping Xu & Xianglan Jiang & Zhibin Wu, 2016. "A Sustainable Performance Assessment Framework for Plastic Film Supply Chain Management from a Chinese Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-23, October.
    12. Joanna Rzempała & Daniel Borkowski & Artur Piotr Rzempała, 2021. "Risk Identification in Cogeneration (Combined Heat and Power) Projects: A Polish Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.
    13. R. N. Ossei-Bremang & F. Kemausuor, 2021. "A decision support system for the selection of sustainable biomass resources for bioenergy production," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 437-454, September.
    14. Marcin Rabe & Dalia Streimikiene & Yuriy Bilan, 2019. "The Concept of Risk and Possibilities of Application of Mathematical Methods in Supporting Decision Making for Sustainable Energy Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, February.
    15. Hyo-Jin Kim & Jeong-Joon Yu & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2019. "Does Combined Heat and Power Play the Role of a Bridge in Energy Transition? Evidence from a Cross-Country Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-8, February.
    16. Mohsen Ramezanzade & Hossein Karimi & Khalid Almutairi & Hoa Ao Xuan & Javad Saebi & Ali Mostafaeipour & Kuaanan Techato, 2021. "Implementing MCDM Techniques for Ranking Renewable Energy Projects under Fuzzy Environment: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-38, November.

    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. 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.
    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. Maria del Mar Casanovas-Rubio & Bernat Vinolas, 2024. "New method for assigning cardinal weights in multi-criteria decision-making: the constant weight ratio method," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 1-33, June.
    4. Baležentis, Tomas & Streimikiene, Dalia, 2017. "Multi-criteria ranking of energy generation scenarios with Monte Carlo simulation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(P1), pages 862-871.
    5. Fang, Hong & Wang, Xu & Song, Wenyan, 2020. "Technology selection for photovoltaic cell from sustainability perspective: An integrated approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1029-1041.
    6. Hsu-Shih Shih, 2016. "A Mixed-Data Evaluation in Group TOPSIS with Differentiated Decision Power," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 537-565, May.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Yeh, Chung-Hsing & J. Willis, Robert & Deng, Hepu & Pan, Hongqi, 1999. "Task oriented weighting in multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 130-146, November.
    11. 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).
    12. C M Yates, 2007. "A positive approach to estimating the weights for quadratic multiple objective programming," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(10), pages 1332-1340, October.
    13. Cavallaro, Fausto & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Streimikiene, Dalia & Mardani, Abbas, 2019. "Assessment of concentrated solar power (CSP) technologies based on a modified intuitionistic fuzzy topsis and trigonometric entropy weights," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 258-270.
    14. 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.
    15. Chiranjib Bhowmik & Sumit Bhowmik & Amitava Ray, 2021. "Selection of optimum green energy sources by considering environmental constructs and their technical criteria: a case study," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(9), pages 13890-13918, September.
    16. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2011. "Compatible weighting method with rank order centroid: Maximum entropy ordered weighted averaging approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(3), pages 552-559, August.
    17. Moshkovich, Helen M. & Mechitov, Alexander I. & Olson, David L., 2002. "Ordinal judgments in multiattribute decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(3), pages 625-641, March.
    18. Vrînceanu, Alexandra & Dumitrașcu, Monica & Kucsicsa, Gheorghe, 2022. "Site suitability for photovoltaic farms and current investment in Romania," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 320-330.
    19. 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.
    20. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Mandakovic, Tomislav & Gupta, Sushil K. & Sahay, Sundeep & Hong, Sungwan, 1995. "A review of program evaluation and fund allocation methods within the service and government sectors," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 59-79, March.

    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:8:y:2016:i:6:p:556-:d:72016. 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.