4.7 Article

Multi-criteria decision making for PV deployment on a multinational level

Journal

SOLAR ENERGY MATERIALS AND SOLAR CELLS
Volume 156, Issue -, Pages 122-127

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.solmat.2016.02.015

Keywords

Multi-criteria analysis (MCA); ELECTRE III; Net Present Value (NPV); Internal Rate of Return (IRR); Payback time (PBT); CO2 contribution; Cost for Support (CFS); Cumulative PV installed

Funding

  1. UK Engineering and Physical Science Research Council (EPSRC) [EP/E036287/1-341/1, EP/K022229/1]
  2. EU COST Actions [MP 1307, TU 1401]
  3. Lithuanian Research Council
  4. Kaunas University of Technology
  5. EPSRC [EP/K022229/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/K022229/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Photovoltaic (PV) system decision making techniques have traditionally been based on a single economic criterion. However, to properly address global and regional targets for green energy economy, it is necessary to consider a myriad of criteria including environmental implications. A global range of existing or emerging financial support policies should be considered, presenting a complex mathematical problem across several stakeholders to decide where, what and when to invest. This paper presents a multi-criteria framework to evaluate the impact of different financial support policies on their attractiveness for domestic PV systems deployment on a multinational level. The paper also reviews historic cumulative PV installation under certain studied financial policies, and brings the framework output into this discussion related to evident effectiveness of these policies. The paper highlights the policies that have the potential to encourage rapid deployment of PV systems which in turn may facilitate sufficient investments to several stakeholders. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. 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