4.7 Article

A new application of multi criteria decision making in energy technology in traditional buildings: A case study of Isfahan

Journal

ENERGY
Volume 240, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2021.122814

Keywords

Wind turbine; Solar photovoltaic; Fuel cell; Hybrid energy system; Electrolyzer; Multi criteria decision making

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study assessed the economic and environmental feasibility of using hybrid energy systems in Isfahan province, Iran, optimized six scenarios using multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods, and found that the PV-WT-CV-BT system was the most suitable system.
The use of hybrid renewable energy has increased in recent years due to the growing environmental concerns caused by the consumption of fossil fuels. The purpose of this study was the economicenvironmental feasibility of using hybrid energy systems in one of the most polluted and populated provinces in Iran, Isfahan province. Various components of the hybrid energy system such as wind turbine (WT), photovoltaic panel (PV), diesel generator (DG), converter (CV) along with two scenarios of energy storage including battery (BT) and hydrogen storage have been considered in modeling the energy system. Six scenarios were considered based on the combination of different components for supplying electricity in the building. The size of the components in the scenarios was optimized based on the minimum cost using HOMER software. Due to the technical, economic and environmental differences between the scenarios, multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods were used to prioritize them. The MCDM results revealed that the PV-WT-CV-BT system was the most suitable system with a cost of 0.947 $/kWh. Also, among the hydrogen storage scenarios, the most suitable system was PV-CVelectrolyzer-hydrogen tank-fuel cell with a cost of 1.898 $/kWh. (c) 2021 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