Optimal wastewater allocation with the development of an SECA multi-criteria decision-making method

被引:26
|
作者
Azbari, Kosar Ebrahimzadeh [1 ]
Ashofteh, Parisa-Sadat [1 ]
Golfam, Parvin [2 ]
Singh, Vijay P. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Qom, Dept Civil Engn, Qom, Iran
[2] Univ Qom, Dept Civil Engn, Civil Engn, Qom, Iran
[3] Texas A&M Univ, Dept Biol & Agr Engn, Zachry Dept Civil & Environm Engn, College Stn, TX USA
关键词
Optimal wastewater allocation; SECA multi-Objective decision-making method; Multi-objective non-linear programming; Optimization the overall performance of the alternatives; Lingo software; REUSE; IRRIGATION; GROUNDWATER; ADAPTATION; CRITERIA;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129041
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The aim of this study is to develop a multi-objective decision-making method, named Simultaneous Evaluation of Criteria and Alternatives (SECA) for optimal ranking of wastewater allocation alternatives. This multi-objective decision-making method is for the continuous environment, meaning that experts can choose the best solution among the solutions obtained. The SECA multi-objective non-linear programming method has three objective functions: (i) maximization of the overall performance of alternatives, (ii) minimization of the deviation of criterion weights from reference point based on the within-criteria variation information, and (iii) minimization of the deviation of criterion weights based on the between-criteria variation information as well as two limitations for the weights of criteria. First, 15 criteria from different fields, including economic, socio-cultural, technological, and environmental, and six alternatives were determined for reusing wastewater, including reuse in the industrial sector, for recreational consumption, supplying environmental demand, artificial aquifer recharge, agricultural irrigation, and landscape irrigation. Then, decision-making matrix was constructed and reference points were calculated. By programming the SECA code in Lingo software and considering different beta values, different weights for criteria and alternatives were ranked. In the other words, determining the best value for beta was the most important step, so different values for beta from 0.1 to 10 were examined. Results showed that in the value of beta equal to 4, the maximum value of the objective function was obtained as 0.6926. Therefore, it was the best value for beta and the weight of the effects on water resources criterion was equal to 0.0957 and was the most important criterion, and the allocation alternative in the environmental sector with a score of 0.8575 was the best wastewater allocation alternative. Followed by the environmental sector alternative, landscape irrigation, industrial sector, artificial aquifer recharge, agricultural irrigation, and recreational consumption were placed. Therefore, water supply for the environmental sector by considering the effect of wastewater on water resources is the best alternative for optimal allocation of wastewater.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Simultaneous Evaluation of Criteria and Alternatives (SECA) for Multi-Criteria Decision-Making
    Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, Mehdi
    Amiri, Maghsoud
    Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras
    Turskis, Zenonas
    Antucheviciene, Jurgita
    INFORMATICA, 2018, 29 (02) : 265 - 280
  • [2] Ranking based on optimal points multi-criteria decision-making method
    Zakeri, Shervin
    GREY SYSTEMS-THEORY AND APPLICATION, 2019, 9 (01) : 45 - 69
  • [3] The stratified multi-criteria decision-making method
    Asadabadi, Mehdi Rajabi
    KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS, 2018, 162 : 115 - 123
  • [4] Multi-Criteria Decision-Making
    Encheva, Sylvia
    MICBE '09: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 10TH WSEAS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTERS IN BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS, 2009, : 192 - +
  • [5] Wastewater Treatment and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods: A Review
    Sharma, Tina
    Kumar, Anuj
    Pant, Sangeeta
    Kotecha, Ketan
    IEEE ACCESS, 2023, 11 : 143704 - 143720
  • [6] When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods
    Saaty, Thomas L.
    Ergu, Daji
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & DECISION MAKING, 2015, 14 (06) : 1171 - 1187
  • [7] A fuzzy multi-criteria emergency decision-making method
    Wu, Wen-Shuai
    Kou, Gang
    Peng, Yi
    Shi, Yong
    Xitong Gongcheng Lilun yu Shijian/System Engineering Theory and Practice, 2012, 32 (06): : 1298 - 1304
  • [8] Fuzzy α-discounting method for multi-criteria decision-making
    Karaman, Atilla
    Dagdeviren, Metin
    JOURNAL OF THE CHINESE INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERS, 2015, 38 (07) : 855 - 865
  • [9] Multiplicative multi-criteria analysis method for decision-making
    Zizovic, Miodrag M.
    Damljanovic, Nada
    Zizovic, Malisa R.
    MAEJO INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2016, 10 (02) : 233 - 241
  • [10] Structure of multi-criteria decision-making
    Brugha, C
    JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 2004, 55 (11) : 1156 - 1168