Decentralised energy and its performance assessment models

doi:10.1007/s42524-020-0148-7

Front. Eng

2021, Vol. 8

Issue (2) : 183-198 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-020-0148-7

REVIEW ARTICLE

Decentralised energy and its performance assessment models

Ting WU, Dong-Ling XU, Jian-Bo YANG(

)

Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9SS, UK

Download: PDF(1572 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

Energy development concerns not only the development of renewable energies but also the shift from centralised to clean, decentralised power generation. The development of decentralised energy (DE) is a core part of the energy and economic strategies being adopted around the world that drives the progress toward a highly sustainable future. This paper reviews the concepts, development status, trends, benefits and challenges of DE systems and analyses the existing models and methods for assessing the performance of these systems. A hierarchical decision model for evaluating the performance of DE systems is also constructed based on the framework of multiple criteria decision analysis, which considers the identification, definition and assessment grade of decision criteria. The evidential reasoning approach is applied to aggregate assessment information in a case study of the implementation of an intelligent decision system. Sensitivity and trade-off analyses are also conducted to show how the proposed model can be used to support decision making in DE systems.

Keywords decentralised energy assessment model MCDA evidential reasoning sensitivity analysis

Corresponding Author(s): Jian-Bo YANG

Just Accepted Date: 03 December 2020 Online First Date: 04 January 2021 Issue Date: 25 March 2021

Cite this article:

Ting WU,Dong-Ling XU,Jian-Bo YANG. Decentralised energy and its performance assessment models[J]. Front. Eng, 2021, 8(2): 183-198.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/10.1007/s42524-020-0148-7
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/Y2021/V8/I2/183

Fig.1 Energy trilemma.

Fig.2 Decentralised power in the future.

Fig.3 Illustrative structure of micro-grids.

Fig.4 Hierarchical assessment framework for DE systems.

Fig.5 Stakeholder analysis for environmental impact assessment.

Tab.1 Information for all criteria in four alternatives

Tab.2 Weights of different levels of criteria

Fig.6 Ranking of the four alternatives in terms of overall performance.

Fig.7 Ranking of the four alternatives for the overall performance as well as each top-level criterion.

Fig.8 Sensitivity analysis after changing the weight of the technical criterion.

Fig.9 Trade-off analysis among economic criterion, reliability, technical criterion and payback period.

1	S Ahmad, R M Tahar (2014). Selection of renewable energy sources for sustainable development of electricity generation system using analytic hierarchy process: A case of Malaysia. Renewable Energy, 63: 458–466 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.10.001
2	G Aiken (2012). Community transitions to low carbon futures in the transition towns network (TTN). Geography Compass, 6(2): 89–99 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00475.x
3	A K Akella, R P Saini, M P Sharma (2009). Social, economic and environmental impacts of renewable energy systems. Renewable Energy, 34(2): 390–396 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2008.05.002
4	P Alstone, D Gershenson, D M Kammen (2015). Decentralised energy systems for clean electricity access. Nature Climate Change, 5(4): 305–314 https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2512
5	N Amjady (2004). A framework of reliability assessment with consideration effect of transient and voltage stabilities. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 19(2): 1005–1014 https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2004.825866
6	P Aragonés-Beltrán, F Chaparro-González, J P Pastor-Ferrando, F Rodríguez-Pozo (2010). An ANP-based approach for the selection of photovoltaic solar power plant investment projects. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(1): 249–264 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.07.012
7	H Aras, Ş Erdoğmuş, E Koç (2004). Multi-criteria selection for a wind observation station location using analytic hierarchy process. Renewable Energy, 29(8): 1383–1392 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2003.12.020
8	M Baumann, M Weil, J F Peters, N Chibeles-Martins, A B Moniz (2019). A review of multi-criteria decision making approaches for evaluating energy storage systems for grid applications. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 107: 516–534 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.02.016
9	T Bauwens, B Gotchev, L Holstenkamp (2016). What drives the development of community energy in Europe? The case of wind power cooperatives. Energy Research & Social Science, 13: 136–147 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.016
10	M Beccali, M Cellura, M Mistretta (2003). Decision-making in energy planning—Application of the Electre method at regional level for the diffusion of renewable energy technology. Renewable Energy, 28(13): 2063–2087 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(03)00102-2
11	B Brand, R Missaoui (2014). Multi-criteria analysis of electricity generation mix scenarios in Tunisia. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39: 251–261 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.069
12	J P Brans, P Vincke, B Mareschal (1986). How to select and how to rank projects: The Promethee method. European Journal of Operational Research, 24(2): 228–238 https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(86)90044-5
13	J Burton, K Hubacek (2007). Is small beautiful? A multicriteria assessment of small-scale energy technology applications in local governments. Energy Policy, 35(12): 6402–6412 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.08.002
14	N Carson, S Davies, G Shields, P Jones, T Hillgarth (2008). Decentralised energy: Business opportunity in resource efficiency and carbon management. The UK Government’s Business Taskforce on Sustainable Consumption and Production
15	F Cavallaro, L Ciraolo (2005). A multicriteria approach to evaluate wind energy plants on an Italian island. Energy Policy, 33(2): 235–244 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(03)00228-3
16	A I Chatzimouratidis, P A Pilavachi (2008). Multicriteria evaluation of power plants impact on the living standard using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Policy, 36(3): 1074–1089 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.11.028
17	A I Chatzimouratidis, P A Pilavachi (2009). Technological, economic and sustainability evaluation of power plants using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Policy, 37(3): 778–787 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.10.009
18	Directorate-General for Energy and Transport (European Commission) (2008). Interconnecting Europe: New Perspective for Trans-European Energy Networks. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
19	Directorate-General for Environment (European Commission) (2009). Study concerning the report on the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive. Final Report. Lyngby
20	J Dong, Y Chi, D Zou, C Fu, Q Huang, M Ni (2014). Energy-environment-economy assessment of waste management systems from a life cycle perspective: Model development and case study. Applied Energy, 114: 400–408 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.09.037
21	H C Doukas, B M Andreas, J E Psarras (2007). Multi-criteria decision aid for the formulation of sustainable technological energy priorities using linguistic variables. European Journal of Operational Research, 182(2): 844–855 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.08.037
22	F Ezbakhe, A Perez-Foguet (2020). Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, in press, doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2020.02.037
23	K R Fowler, C L Silver (2015). Developing and Managing Embedded Systems and Products: Methods, Techniques, Tools, Processes, and Teamwork. London: Newnes
24	Guidehouse Insights (2020). Global DER Deployment Database 3Q20. Available at:
25	D A Haralambopoulos, H Polatidis (2003). Renewable energy projects: Structuring a multi-criteria group decision-making framework. Renewable Energy, 28(6): 961–973 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(02)00072-1
26	N Hatziargyriou (2014). Microgrids: Architectures and Control. New York: John Wiley & Sons
27	D Heller (2017). The implications of digital currencies for monetary policy. Directorate-General for Internal Policies—Policy Department A: Economic and Scientific Policy
28	C Kahraman, İ Kaya (2010). A fuzzy multicriteria methodology for selection among energy alternatives. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(9): 6270–6281 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.02.095
29	C Karakosta, C Pappas, V Marinakis, J Psarras (2013). Renewable energy and nuclear power towards sustainable development: Characteristics and prospects. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 22: 187–197 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.01.035
30	T Kaya, C Kahraman (2010). Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul. Energy, 35(6): 2517–2527 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.02.051
31	A Ç Köne, T Büke (2007). An analytical network process (ANP) evaluation of alternative fuels for electricity generation in Turkey. Energy Policy, 35(10): 5220–5228 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.05.014
32	D Latinopoulos, K Kechagia (2015). A GIS-based multi-criteria evaluation for wind farm site selection—A regional scale application in Greece. Renewable Energy, 78: 550–560 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2015.01.041
33	D P Lawrence (2007). Impact significance determination—back to basics. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27(8): 755–769 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2007.02.011
34	S K Lee, G Mogi, J W Kim (2009). Decision support for prioritizing energy technologies against high oil prices: A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 22(6): 915–920 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2009.07.001
35	I Linkov, M E Bates, L J Canis, T P Seager, J M Keisler (2011). A decision-directed approach for prioritizing research into the impact of nanomaterials on the environment and human health. Nature Nanotechnology, 6(12): 784–787 https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2011.163 pmid: 21963715
36	K Lo (2014). A critical review of China’s rapidly developing renewable energy and energy efficiency policies. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 29: 508–516 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.09.006
37	H Lund (2007). Renewable energy strategies for sustainable development. Energy, 32(6): 912–919 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2006.10.017
38	R Madlener, K Kowalski, S Stagl (2007). New ways for the integrated appraisal of national energy scenarios: The case of renewable energy use in Austria. Energy Policy, 35(12): 6060–6074 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.08.015
39	M Mahdy, A S Bahaj (2018). Multi criteria decision analysis for offshore wind energy potential in Egypt. Renewable Energy, 118: 278–289 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.11.021
40	R Mamlook, B A Akash, S Nijmeh (2001). Fuzzy sets programming to perform evaluation of solar systems in Jordan. Energy Conversion and Management, 42(14): 1717–1726 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(00)00152-7
41	A Menegaki (2008). Valuation for renewable energy: A comparative review. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12(9): 2422–2437 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2007.06.003
42	R K Mitchell, B R Agle, D J Wood (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4): 853–886 https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105
43	A S Morris, R Langari (2012). Measurement reliability and safety systems. In: Morris A S, Langari R, eds. Measurement and Instrumentation: Theory and Application. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 291–316
44	J C Mourmouris, C Potolias (2013). A multi-criteria methodology for energy planning and developing renewable energy sources at a regional level: A case study Thassos, Greece. Energy Policy, 52: 522–530 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.09.074
45	T Myllyviita, A Holma, R Antikainen, K Lahtinen, P Leskinen (2012). Assessing environmental impacts of biomass production chains—Application of life cycle assessment (LCA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). Journal of Cleaner Production, 29–30: 238–245 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.019
46	K Narula, Y Nagai, S Pachauri (2012). The role of decentralized distributed generation in achieving universal rural electrification in South Asia by 2030. Energy Policy, 47: 345–357 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.04.075
47	K Nigim, N Munier, J Green (2004). Pre-feasibility MCDM tools to aid communities in prioritizing local viable renewable energy sources. Renewable Energy, 29(11): 1775–1791 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2004.02.012
48	J Oberschmidt, J Geldermann, J Ludwig, M Schmehl (2010). Modified PROMETHEE approach for assessing energy technologies. International Journal of Energy Sector Management, 4(2): 183–212
49	A Omer (2008). Energy, environment and sustainable development. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12(9): 2265–2300 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2007.05.001
50	S Önüt, U R Tuzkaya, N Saadet (2008). Multiple criteria evaluation of current energy resources for Turkish manufacturing industry. Energy Conversion and Management, 49(6): 1480–1492 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2007.12.026
51	A Papadopoulos, A Karagiannidis (2008). Application of the multi-criteria analysis method Electre III for the optimisation of decentralised energy systems. Omega, 36(5): 766–776 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2006.01.004
52	P A Pilavachi, C P Roumpeas, S Minett, N H Afgan (2006). Multi-criteria evaluation for CHP system options. Energy Conversion and Management, 47(20): 3519–3529 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2006.03.004
53	B Roy (1990). The outranking approach and the foundations of Electre Methods. In: Bana e Costa C A, ed. Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid. Berlin: Springer, 155–183
54	C Ruppert-Winkel, J Hauber (2014). Changing the energy system towards renewable energy self-sufficiency—Towards a multi-perspective and interdisciplinary framework. Sustainability, 6(5): 2822–2831 https://doi.org/10.3390/su6052822
55	J R San Cristóbal (2011). Multi-criteria decision-making in the selection of a renewable energy project in Spain: The VIKOR method. Renewable Energy, 36(2): 498–502 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2010.07.031
56	E W Stein (2013). A comprehensive multi-criteria model to rank electric energy production technologies. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 22: 640–654 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.02.001
57	J Twidell, T Weir (2015). Renewable Energy Resources. 3rd ed. London: Routledge
58	UK Department of Trade and Industry (2006). The Energy Challenge —Energy Review Report 2006
59	J F Walker, N Jenkins (1997). Wind Energy Technology. Wiley
60	T Wanderer, S Herle (2015). Creating a spatial multi-criteria decision support system for energy related integrated environmental impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 52: 2–8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2014.09.002
61	J J Wang, Y Y Jing, C F Zhang, J H Zhao (2009). Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13(9): 2263–2278 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.06.021
62	J Wątróbski, P Ziemba, W Wolski (2015). Methodological aspects of decision support system for the location of renewable energy sources. In: Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems. IEEE, 1451–1459
63	J Wu, C Zuidema, K Gugerell (2018). Experimenting with decentralized energy governance in China: The case of New Energy Demonstration City program. Journal of Cleaner Production, 189: 830–838 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.123
64	T Wu, D L Xu, J B Yang (2017). A review on multiple criteria performance analysis of renewable energy systems. In: 13th IEEE International Conference on Control & Automation (ICCA). Ohrid, 822–827
65	T Wu, D L Xu, J B Yang (2019). Multiple criteria performance assessment for decentralized energy systems: A case study. In: 5th International Conference on Information Management (ICIM). Cambridge, 257–261
66	D L Xu, J B Yang (2003). Intelligent decision system for self-assessment. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 12(1): 43–60 https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.343
67	J B Yang (2001). Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under uncertainties. European Journal of Operational Research, 131(1): 31–61 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00441-5
68	J B Yang, D L Xu (2002). On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Part A—Systems and Humans, 32(3): 289–304 https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCA.2002.802746
69	J B Yang, D L Xu (2013). Evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination. Artificial Intelligence, 205: 1–29 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2013.09.003
70	W Yu, G B Sheblé, J A P Lopes, M A Matos (2006). Valuation of switchable tariff for wind energy. Electric Power Systems Research, 76(5): 382–388 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2005.09.004
71	H Zhao, S Guo (2015). External benefit evaluation of renewable energy power in China for sustainability. Sustainability, 7(5): 4783–4805 https://doi.org/10.3390/su7054783
72	J Zhao, Z Yang, S Chen (2009). Multi-criteria evaluation of alternative power supply using analytic hierarchy process. In: International Conference on Sustainable Power Generation and Supply. Nanjing, 1–7
73	P Zhou, B W Ang, K L Poh (2006). Decision analysis in energy and environmental modelling: An update. Energy, 31(14): 2604–2622 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2005.10.023
74	C Zou (2020). New Energy. Singapore: Springer

[1]	Panitas Sureeyatanapas,Jian-Bo Yang,David Bamford. Evaluation of Corporate Sustainability[J]. Front. Eng, 2014, 1(2): 176-194.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed