A Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (fahp) Approach for Optimal Selection of Low-carbon Energy Technologies

In process systems engineering, one may encounter design problems that require choosing one among the predefined set of alternatives in a complex decision making environment. In most cases, the selection process involves multiple conflicting criteria that can be either qualitative or quantitative in nature. The use of multiple attribute decision making (MADM) technique thus has been proven effective in providing a transparent, systematic and rational approach to problem solving. In this study, a variant of the widely used MADM technique known as the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) has been developed and applied for the selection of low-carbon technologies. This approach enables the selection of optimal alternative by incorporating not only the judgment of domain experts but also their degree of confidence through the use of fuzzy numbers for the pairwise comparison ratios in the AHP decision framework. The proposed fuzzy AHP then determines a set of crisp weights that maximizes the degree of consistency of all judgments taken together. The said approach can also derive crisp weights from an incomplete fuzzy pairwise comparative judgment matrix (PCJM). To illustrate the technique, a case study involving comparison of electricity storage technologies for renewable energy systems is considered. This selection problem is important due to the intermittent nature of many forms of renewable energy, which thus require costeffective auxiliary energy storage subsystems for successful deployment.

[1]  T Furuichi,et al.  A fuzzy analytic network process for multi-criteria evaluation of contaminated site remedial countermeasures. , 2008, Journal of environmental management.

[2]  Raymond R. Tan,et al.  A Group Fuzzy Analytic Network Process to Prioritize Low Carbon Energy Systems in the Philippines , 2014 .

[3]  Sushil Kumar,et al.  Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[4]  M. Ramachandran,et al.  Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review , 2004 .

[5]  Alessio Ishizaka,et al.  Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process , 2011, Expert Syst. Appl..

[6]  Pavel Senovsky,et al.  Preference Risk Assessment of Electric Power Critical Infrastructure , 2014 .

[7]  T. L. Saaty A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures , 1977 .

[8]  Edrisi Muñoz,et al.  Decision Making Support Based on a Process Engineering Ontology for Waste Treatment Plant Optimization , 2013 .

[9]  Ozcan Arslan,et al.  Quantitative evaluation of precautions on chemical tanker operations , 2009 .

[10]  Mehpare Timor,et al.  The analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process: an overview of applications , 2010 .

[11]  Susan M. Schoenung,et al.  Energy storage systems cost update : a study for the DOE Energy Storage Systems Program. , 2011 .

[12]  S Pacala,et al.  Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies , 2004, Science.

[13]  F. Chapin,et al.  A safe operating space for humanity , 2009, Nature.

[14]  Raymond R. Tan,et al.  Fuzzy AHP approach to selection problems in process engineering involving quantitative and qualitative aspects , 2014 .