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

被引:0
|
作者
Patil, Shivaraj Chandrakant [1 ]
Schulze-Netzer, Corinna [2 ]
Korpas, Magnus [1 ]
机构
[1] Norwegian Univ Sci & Technol, Dept Elect Energy, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway
[2] Norwegian Univ Sci & Technol, Dept Energy & Proc Engn, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway
来源
SMART ENERGY | 2024年 / 16卷
关键词
Waste-to-energy technologies; Multi-criteria decision analysis; Analytical hierarchy process; Optimal solution; Decision support; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; MUNICIPAL SOLID-WASTE; ANAEROBIC-DIGESTION; POLICY; GASIFICATION; OPTIONS; PLANTS; INDIA;
D O I
10.1016/j.segy.2024.100157
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A Multi-Criteria Decision Making Procedure for the Analysis of an Energy System
    Ming-Shan Zhu Bu-Xuan Wang Yun-Han Xiao Department of Thermal Engineering
    Journal of Thermal Science, 1992, (04) : 221 - 225
  • [22] Appendix A: Multi-criteria decision analysis
    Linkov, I
    Steevens, J.
    CYANOBACTERIAL HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOMS: STATE OF THE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH NEEDS, 2008, 619 : 815 - 829
  • [23] Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Select Waste to Energy Technology for a Mega City: The Case of Moscow
    Kurbatova, Anna
    Abu-Qdais, Hani Ahmed
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 12 (23) : 1 - 18
  • [24] A comparative assessment of multi-criteria decision analysis for flood susceptibility modelling
    Shahiri Tabarestani, Ehsan
    Afzalimehr, Hossein
    GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL, 2022, 37 (20) : 5851 - 5874
  • [25] Multi-criteria decision analysis of energy system transformation pathways: A case study for Switzerland
    Volkart, Kathrin
    Weidmann, Nicolas
    Bauer, Christian
    Hirschberg, Stefan
    ENERGY POLICY, 2017, 106 : 155 - 168
  • [26] Comparative study on air gasification of plastic waste and conventional biomass based on coupling of AHP/TOPSIS multi-criteria decision analysis
    Mojaver, Mehran
    Hasanzadeh, Rezgar
    Azdast, Taher
    Park, Chul B.
    CHEMOSPHERE, 2022, 286
  • [27] Dry Sanitation Technologies: Developing a Simplified Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Tool
    Santos, Margarida Fidelis
    Castro, Carolina Pires
    Matos, Rita Ventura
    Alves, Liliana
    Matos, Jose Saldanha
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (19)
  • [28] Matti - a multi-criteria decision analysis framework for assessing wastewater treatment technologies
    da Silva, Luis Carlos Soares
    Salomao, Andre Luis de Sa
    Santos, Ana Silvia Pereira
    WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2022, 86 (10) : 2764 - 2776
  • [29] Comparing Waste-to-Energy technologies by applying energy system analysis
    Munster, Marie
    Lund, Henrik
    WASTE MANAGEMENT, 2010, 30 (07) : 1251 - 1263
  • [30] Waste-to-energy, municipal solid waste treatment, and best available technology: Comprehensive evaluation by an interval-valued fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method
    Wang, Zhenfeng
    Ren, Jingzheng
    Goodsite, Michael Evan
    Xu, Guangyin
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2018, 172 : 887 - 899