当前和新兴的废物变能源技术:多标准决策分析比较研究

IF 5.4 Q2 ENERGY & FUELS
Shivaraj Chandrakant Patil , Corinna Schulze-Netzer , Magnus Korpås
{"title":"当前和新兴的废物变能源技术:多标准决策分析比较研究","authors":"Shivaraj Chandrakant Patil ,&nbsp;Corinna Schulze-Netzer ,&nbsp;Magnus Korpås","doi":"10.1016/j.segy.2024.100157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In response to the rise in waste crisis and the possibility of energy utilization from waste, there has been increasing interest in waste-to-energy (WtE) conversion technologies, which requires intense scientific attention. There are diverse WtE technologies that apply to different waste types and require multidisciplinary decision support. The paper applies a Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tool to compare their economic, technological, socio-cultural, and environmental aspects to help identify the most promising choice. The comparison used in this study concerns four widely used technologies: Incineration (INC), Anaerobic Digestion (AD), Gasification (GAS), and Pyrolysis (PYR), and one emerging WtE conversion technology, Hydro-thermal Carbonization (HTC). The Comparison criteria are divided into four main criteria and fifteen sub-criteria. The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) model was implemented using ’SuperDecisions’ software to make pairwise comparisons of identified criteria and to rank the WtE technology alternatives. Thirty-two international studies were shortlisted to gather data and provide input into the AHP model. The results show that the environmental factors are prioritized with a priority vector of 0.56. Further, the study concludes that the most suitable WtE technology, based on chosen parameters, is AD, followed by HTC, INC, and PYR with the priority vectors of 0.348, 0.201, 0.162, and 0.148, respectively, provided applicability. The emerging technology, HTC, is found to be the second most suitable technology. Further, the results represent the hierarchy structure arranged so that the main components are divided into sub-components with alternatives at the structure’s base, and the ’SuperDecisions’ model based on this hierarchy can be used in the future to find suitable WtE technology for a specific city with the necessary input for identified main and sub-criteria. This research not only provides a structured comparison of WtE technologies but also offers a scalable AHP framework that can be adapted for specific municipal contexts in future studies. By addressing the diverse needs of decision-makers across different regions, our model contributes to a more nuanced understanding of WtE technology selection and lays the groundwork for incorporating local policies and regulations in subsequent research phases.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34738,"journal":{"name":"Smart Energy","volume":"16 ","pages":"Article 100157"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666955224000273/pdfft?md5=d09ea75c7df06468cfc89c10a57bc0bd&pid=1-s2.0-S2666955224000273-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Current and emerging waste-to-energy technologies: A comparative study with multi-criteria decision analysis\",\"authors\":\"Shivaraj Chandrakant Patil ,&nbsp;Corinna Schulze-Netzer ,&nbsp;Magnus Korpås\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.segy.2024.100157\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In response to the rise in waste crisis and the possibility of energy utilization from waste, there has been increasing interest in waste-to-energy (WtE) conversion technologies, which requires intense scientific attention. There are diverse WtE technologies that apply to different waste types and require multidisciplinary decision support. The paper applies a Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tool to compare their economic, technological, socio-cultural, and environmental aspects to help identify the most promising choice. The comparison used in this study concerns four widely used technologies: Incineration (INC), Anaerobic Digestion (AD), Gasification (GAS), and Pyrolysis (PYR), and one emerging WtE conversion technology, Hydro-thermal Carbonization (HTC). The Comparison criteria are divided into four main criteria and fifteen sub-criteria. The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) model was implemented using ’SuperDecisions’ software to make pairwise comparisons of identified criteria and to rank the WtE technology alternatives. Thirty-two international studies were shortlisted to gather data and provide input into the AHP model. The results show that the environmental factors are prioritized with a priority vector of 0.56. Further, the study concludes that the most suitable WtE technology, based on chosen parameters, is AD, followed by HTC, INC, and PYR with the priority vectors of 0.348, 0.201, 0.162, and 0.148, respectively, provided applicability. The emerging technology, HTC, is found to be the second most suitable technology. Further, the results represent the hierarchy structure arranged so that the main components are divided into sub-components with alternatives at the structure’s base, and the ’SuperDecisions’ model based on this hierarchy can be used in the future to find suitable WtE technology for a specific city with the necessary input for identified main and sub-criteria. This research not only provides a structured comparison of WtE technologies but also offers a scalable AHP framework that can be adapted for specific municipal contexts in future studies. By addressing the diverse needs of decision-makers across different regions, our model contributes to a more nuanced understanding of WtE technology selection and lays the groundwork for incorporating local policies and regulations in subsequent research phases.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34738,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Smart Energy\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100157\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666955224000273/pdfft?md5=d09ea75c7df06468cfc89c10a57bc0bd&pid=1-s2.0-S2666955224000273-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Smart Energy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666955224000273\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Smart Energy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666955224000273","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为应对日益严重的废物危机和从废物中利用能源的可能性,人们对废物转化为能源(WtE)技术的兴趣与日俱增,这需要科学界的密切关注。WtE 技术多种多样,适用于不同类型的废物,需要多学科决策支持。本文采用多标准决策分析(MCDA)工具对其经济、技术、社会文化和环境方面进行比较,以帮助确定最有前途的选择。本研究中的比较涉及四种广泛使用的技术:焚化 (INC)、厌氧消化 (AD)、气化 (GAS) 和热解 (PYR),以及一种新兴的 WtE 转化技术--水热碳化 (HTC)。比较标准分为四个主要标准和十五个次级标准。使用 "SuperDecisions "软件实施了层次分析法(AHP)模型,对确定的标准进行成对比较,并对 WtE 技术备选方案进行排序。筛选出 32 项国际研究,以收集数据并为 AHP 模型提供输入。结果显示,环境因素的优先级向量为 0.56。此外,研究还得出结论,根据所选参数,最合适的 WtE 技术是厌氧消化(AD)技术,其次是 HTC、INC 和 PYR,优先矢量分别为 0.348、0.201、0.162 和 0.148。新兴技术 HTC 被认为是第二适合的技术。此外,研究结果体现了层次结构的排列方式,即主要成分被划分为子成分,替代品位于结构的底层,基于该层次结构的 "超级决策 "模型可在未来用于为特定城市寻找合适的 WtE 技术,并为已确定的主要和次要标准提供必要的输入。这项研究不仅对水处理技术进行了结构化比较,还提供了一个可扩展的 AHP 框架,可在今后的研究中根据具体城市的情况进行调整。通过满足不同地区决策者的不同需求,我们的模型有助于更细致地了解 WtE 技术的选择,并为在后续研究阶段纳入地方政策和法规奠定基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Current and emerging waste-to-energy technologies: A comparative study with multi-criteria decision analysis

Current and emerging waste-to-energy technologies: A comparative study with multi-criteria decision analysis
In response to the rise in waste crisis and the possibility of energy utilization from waste, there has been increasing interest in waste-to-energy (WtE) conversion technologies, which requires intense scientific attention. There are diverse WtE technologies that apply to different waste types and require multidisciplinary decision support. The paper applies a Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tool to compare their economic, technological, socio-cultural, and environmental aspects to help identify the most promising choice. The comparison used in this study concerns four widely used technologies: Incineration (INC), Anaerobic Digestion (AD), Gasification (GAS), and Pyrolysis (PYR), and one emerging WtE conversion technology, Hydro-thermal Carbonization (HTC). The Comparison criteria are divided into four main criteria and fifteen sub-criteria. The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) model was implemented using ’SuperDecisions’ software to make pairwise comparisons of identified criteria and to rank the WtE technology alternatives. Thirty-two international studies were shortlisted to gather data and provide input into the AHP model. The results show that the environmental factors are prioritized with a priority vector of 0.56. Further, the study concludes that the most suitable WtE technology, based on chosen parameters, is AD, followed by HTC, INC, and PYR with the priority vectors of 0.348, 0.201, 0.162, and 0.148, respectively, provided applicability. The emerging technology, HTC, is found to be the second most suitable technology. Further, the results represent the hierarchy structure arranged so that the main components are divided into sub-components with alternatives at the structure’s base, and the ’SuperDecisions’ model based on this hierarchy can be used in the future to find suitable WtE technology for a specific city with the necessary input for identified main and sub-criteria. This research not only provides a structured comparison of WtE technologies but also offers a scalable AHP framework that can be adapted for specific municipal contexts in future studies. By addressing the diverse needs of decision-makers across different regions, our model contributes to a more nuanced understanding of WtE technology selection and lays the groundwork for incorporating local policies and regulations in subsequent research phases.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Smart Energy
Smart Energy Engineering-Mechanical Engineering
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
73 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信