4.7 Article

A multi criteria decision support framework for renewable energy storage technology selection

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 277, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122183

Keywords

Renewable energy storage technology; Technology selection; Group decision-making; Decision support framework

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71503103]
  2. Humanities and Social Sciences of Education Ministry [17YJC640233]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20150157]
  4. Soft Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BR2018005]
  5. Jiangsu Province University Philosophy and Social Sciences for Key Research Program [2017ZDIXM034]
  6. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2019JDZD06]
  7. Jiangsu Association of Science and Technology [JSKXKT 2020023]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The selection of renewable energy storage technology has important significance for maintaining the supply and demand balance of renewable energy, reducing the application cost of new energy and accelerating the pace of the new energy revolution. Different from the existing research which regards the selection of energy storage technology as a multi-criteria decision-making problem, it is called as a multi-criteria group decision-making problem in this study. This paper defines the dual hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy linguistic term sets and proposes a multi criteria decision support framework for renewable energy storage technology selection from the perspective of group decision-making. Then, the empirical example considers the case of energy storage technology selection in Jiangsu Province, China. The proposed method is exploited to analyze the robustness of the results and its comparison to other methods. The case study shoes that it can help the managers scientifically choose more suitable renewable energy storage technology alternatives. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available