Exploring tapping potential of solar energy: Prioritization of Indian states

Present study is among the first attempts to prioritize the prominent Indian states for better utilization of available solar resources. In this context, potentiality indices are performed on the basis of six prime factors that influence the effective utilization of solar energy and ranking is done accordingly. Firstly, in order to determine the weightage and hierarchy of the evaluation parameters modified digital logic (MDL) approach is employed. Availability of solar radiation is found to be the most influential parameter. Thereafter, fuzzy-analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is used for determination of the potentiality index and the corresponding ranking of different states. The ranks thus obtained are compared to current installed capacity ranks. It is found that a few states despite of high potential for the exploitation of solar energy are not getting proper attention by their respective governments. In order to promote the solar energy exploitation in such states it becomes vital to identify the vital parameters that may lead to the improvement in the current ranking. In this direction, sensitivity analysis is performed to determine the percentage change in distinct parameters which is required for the upgradation in the ranking. Such studies are capable to make a paradigm shift in technology utilization and formulation of energy policies as the proposed approach provides a concrete layout for re-evaluation of current policies as well as formulation of newer ones.

[1]  T. Saaty.  Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory With the Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2000 .

[2]  Jyrki Kangas,et al.  The Analytic Hierachy Process (AHP): Standard Version, Forestry Application and Advances , 1999 .

[3]  Rahul Vaish,et al.  Application Oriented Selection of Optimal Sintering Temperature from User Perspective: A Study on K0.5Na0.5NbO3 Ceramics , 2015 .

[4]  Sunil Luthra,et al.  Analysis of barriers to implement solar power installations in India using interpretive structural modeling technique , 2013 .

[5]  Annika Kangas,et al.  Applying voting theory in natural resource management: a case of multiple-criteria group decision support. , 2002, Journal of environmental management.

[6]  Rahul Vaish,et al.  Selection of Lead‐Free Piezoelectric Ceramics , 2014 .

[7]  E. Triantaphyllou,et al.  A Sensitivity Analysis Approach for Some Deterministic Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods* , 1997 .

[8]  R. Rao.  A material selection model using graph theory and matrix approach , 2006 .

[9]  L. Anojkumar,et al.  Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for pipe material selection in sugar industry , 2014, Expert Syst. Appl..

[10]  Rita Almeida Ribeiro.  Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: A review and new preference elicitation techniques , 1996, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[11]  Zhengyi Yao,et al.  Research on an optimal site selection model for desert photovoltaic power plants based on analytic hierarchy process and geographic information system , 2013 .

[12]  Majid Vafaeipour,et al.  Assessment of regions priority for implementation of solar projects in Iran: New application of a hybrid multi-criteria decision making approach , 2014 .

[13]  Feng Tian-tian,et al.  Macro-site selection of wind/solar hybrid power station based on Ideal Matter-Element Model , 2013 .

[14]  Amitava Ray,et al.  Optimal Selection of Material: An Eclectic Decision , 2015 .

[15]  Dixit Garg,et al.  Barriers to renewable/sustainable energy technologies adoption: Indian perspective , 2015 .

[16]  Filippo Emanuele Ciarapica,et al.  A FUZZY-QFD APPROACH TO SUPPLIER SELECTION , 2006 .

[17]  T. Daim,et al.  Selection of Renewable Energy Technologies for a Developing County: A Case of Pakistan , 2011 .

[18]  R. Parameshwaran,et al.  An integrated fuzzy MCDM based approach for robot selection considering objective and subjective criteria , 2015, Appl. Soft Comput..

[19]  C. Kahraman,et al.  Multi‐criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP , 2003 .

[20]  Sudeep Yadav,et al.  SELECTION AND RANKING OF MULTIFACETED CRITERIA FOR THE PRIORITIZATION OF MOST APPROPRIATE CONVERSION TECHNOLOGY FOR BIOMASS TO BIOFUEL IN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE USING ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS , 2015 .

[21]  A. Saltelli,et al.  Importance measures in global sensitivity analysis of nonlinear models , 1996 .

[22]  Christopher R. Bowen,et al.  Selection of Ferroelectric Ceramics for Transducers and Electrical Energy Storage Devices , 2015 .

[23]  Mevlut Uyan.  GIS-based solar farms site selection using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in Karapinar region, Konya/Turkey , 2013 .

[24]  Li Dengfeng,et al.  New similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets and application to pattern recognitions , 2002, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[25]  C K Kwong,et al.  Determining the Importance Weights for the Customer Requirements in QFD Using a Fuzzy AHP with an Extent Analysis Approach , 2003 .

[26]  Rahul Vaish,et al.  Selection of optimal sintering temperature of K0.5Na0.5NbO3 ceramics for electromechanical applications , 2014 .

[27]  Sandeep Grover,et al.  Manufacturing system’s effectiveness measurement by using combined approach of ANP and GTMA , 2013, Int. J. Syst. Assur. Eng. Manag..

[28]  L. Kuhn,et al.  Cluster analysis of consensus water sites in thrombin and trypsin shows conservation between serine proteases and contributions to ligand specificity , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[29]  Heather Cruickshank,et al.  Making the deployment of pico-PV more sustainable along the value chain , 2014 .

[30]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  The Concepts of a Linguistic Variable and its Application to Approximate Reasoning , 1975 .

[31]  Richard Bellman,et al.  Decision-making in fuzzy environment , 2012 .

[32]  Derong Liu,et al.  Action dependent heuristic dynamic programming for home energy resource scheduling , 2013 .

[33]  Prashant Baredar,et al.  Status of solar wind renewable energy in India , 2013 .

[34]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  Fuzzy Sets , 1996, Inf. Control..

[35]  J. Painuly,et al.  Diffusion of renewable energy technologies—barriers and stakeholders’ perspectives , 2004 .

[36]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2012 .

[37]  Saurabh Vats,et al.  Selection of optimal electronic toll collection system for India: A subjective-fuzzy decision making approach , 2014, Appl. Soft Comput..

[38]  J. Painuly.  Barriers to renewable energy penetration; a framework for analysis , 2001 .

[39]  A. Noorul Haq,et al.  Analysis of enablers for the implementation of leagile supply chain management using an integrated fuzzy QFD approach , 2017, J. Intell. Manuf..

[40]  Rahul Vaish,et al.  Piezoelectric material selection for transducers under fuzzy environment , 2013, Journal of Advanced Ceramics.

[41]  Rahul Vaish,et al.  Phase Change Materials Selection for Latent Heat Thermal Energy Storage Systems (LHTESS): An Industrial Engineering Initiative Towards Materials Science , 2014 .

[42]  Hamid Alinejad-Rokny,et al.  Selection of the best well control system by using fuzzy multiple-attribute decision-making methods , 2014 .

[43]  T. Ramachandra,et al.  Hotspots of solar potential in India , 2011 .

[44]  A. Abedian,et al.  A novel method for materials selection in mechanical design: Combination of non-linear normalization and a modified digital logic method , 2007 .

[45]  Stefano Tarantola,et al.  Sensitivity Analysis in Practice: A Guide to Assessing Scientific Models , 2004 .